Slashdot needs a 'HERO' tag
on
Saving Huygens
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
While slashdot has category icons, it really REALLY needs a "hero" tag, like you'd see on Fark.
This engineer that found the problem and rallied against opposition to see that this gets fixed is, in my opinion, a total hero. The world would be a much better place if more people like him were around!
I remember reading about a researcher who wanted to study genetic algorithms. I wish I had a link handy, but googling didn't turn it up.
Anyway, this guy wants to create a genetic algorithm that results in a circuit that can detect the difference between two tones, one something like 200 HZ and the other 2 KHZ.
He uses an FPGA chip to do the testing with. After a few weeks, he has an FPGA programmed such that it reliably discerns between the two input signals.
So, how does it work? Downloading the program from the FPGA chip results in a nonsensical circuit - except that it works. Running the same program on another FPGA chip of the same model results in a total failure.
Even changing the power supply makes the circuit not work! Months of study results in a complete, total unknown. Results inconclusive.
The human genome is not built of simple, engineered pieces. Interactions will occur with the total sum of possible interactions, down to the molecular level.
It will be many, many years before our own microbiological structure is understood. As we proceed, we'll see information technology and biology merge, as, when push comes to shove, both consist of the replication of complex patterns.
Function Error($str='') { static $error; if (stlren($str))
{
$error=$str;
ErrorHandler(0, $str, '', 0);
} else
return $error; }
Set_Error_Hander('errorHandler');
It's stupid simple. Do a tail -f of LOGFILE to see what's happening while you develop. Language errors will show the file/line number, and you'll know exactly when the error occurred, as well.
I don't want to think about how much time this has saved!
I've been coding for some time very extensively using PHP. It, along with GTK is a good, high-level language that lets me get lots done, very quickly.
In many cases, it will accomodate common errors, such as strings not being quoted, etc seemingly without complaint.
However, I recently changed my strategy to one of "zero tolerance", which entailed me reducing the error reporting threshold to 0 (all errors) as well as defining a standardized error handler callback function. I spent about a month just going thru the existing codebase to quote all the strings, etc.
However, now having done paid that price, I'm quite surprised at how often bugs that would have previously gone un-noticed pop out in clear view.
Undefined variables previously translated to equal false now stand out as a mis-spelling. Database errors previously un-noticed suddenly highlighted and shown to me. Hiccups in the code previously shown to users now archived and hidden away so that I see them instead.
It's made a HUGE difference - I'm more productive despite the appearance of having more to look out for!
I also have a generic error() function defined that's really a wrapper for the error handler - so the error logging system now in place works for language errors and logic errors alike.
The Microsoft.NET Framework and SDK are free. The Microsoft C# compiler is free. The Microsoft VB.NET compiler is free. The Microsoft C compiler is free. The Microsoft C++ compiler is free.
A Microsoft WebForm IDE is free (WebMatrix)
Free as in Beer. Find a bug in VB.NET compiler? Good luck fixing it....
PS: Ever wonder about the Intellectual Property of Beer producers? Their secret recipes and whatnot? Would they be offended by "Free as in beer"? Funny though, that.
I'm one of those people that live on the 'net. I have a nice, Dell, linux laptop. I write software for use on the 'net.
I'm not only one of those people who don't know if "redundant failover" is a standard English term, my wife doesn't know either.
I've never had a PDA. I've played a few times, but they seem like a pain in the rear. I've found that $0.15 at the local Target/Wal-Mart does just fine in the form of a spiral-bound notebook, and I don't have to worry about battteries, either.
I've played with them PDA things. They're neat. But, drop one sometime on the beach, so that the sand gets into them. Or, have a battery go dead.
Sorry, what I write down is more important than that. If I write it on the server, or on my laptop, it gets backed up automatically every night. If I write it on a notebook, it's pretty safe. (I have a running record of $0.25 notebook notes going back almost 4 years)
So, where's the compelling advantage? Why don't they offer a backup service for a few dollars per month?
If my phone dies, I shouldn't have to reload the contact list, and anything saved on the phone should be available on the new phone. Until that happens, I'm going go focus on good reception and not pay much attention to anything else. What's the point?
I have a Dell Inspiron 600m. While not as Linux-compatable as I would have liked, I've been able to get ATI Mobile M9 video system in it to run alongside my 19" CRT in a "dual head" configuration, even with different resolution monitors as a single desktop.
Until you've done it, you just can't really comment.
When I get into heavy coding, nothing beats having two monitors. Typically, I'll have my Fedora Core desktop running, VMWare running in a window with whatever O/S inside that (frequently Win2000), 6 or so xterms, and a few Mozilla windows, all at once.
Trying to get this to fly with just one monitor is quite difficult and requires very careful attention to the location of overlapping windows so I can switch between them easily.
But, with two monitors, 6 virtual desktops, and an ergo keyboard, I find that I can just FLY, unencumbered.
BTW, I've posted my XF86Config file for your use and tweaking if it should prove useful for you. To use dual-head, I start Xwindows with "startx -- -layout multiple". (I boot into runlevel 3)
When I "go remote" I really, REALLY miss my extra screen real-estate!
I'm an independant consultant/programmer. My job is about 1/3 programmer, 1/3 salesman, and 1/3 workflow analyst.
I'm in no danger of losing my contracts anytime soon. From where I sit, the biggest problem programmers et al have with their respective client businesses is lack of understanding of the real needs of the end customer.
Take the time to get to really, REALLY know your target audience. Listen - long and hard, become familiar with their terminology, their concerns, their worries. Get in their minds, become, as much as you can, THEM. Wash, rinse, repeat.
Many people almost don't know what to think when somebody really, truly listens to them. Sometimes they're taken aback - but they always love it. And, when you deliver the exact solution to their needs, (even late) they will kiss your feet.
One big problem is humility - how many programmers figure they're work 6 figures, and the customer is a necessary evil? When, in fact, the customer is the point?
I spent some time learning a bit of Python, only to abandon it. Not because of Python, but because I had too much inertia going in various PHP projects that pulled me back.
Python caused me to change my layout for code, almost instantly eliminating a big problem with c-like code: the missing brace.
Most code is structured like this:
Function fubar {
statement a;
do (b);
if (c()) {
performfunction(x);
}
}
In this small segment, notice that there are to sets of braces - and they don't line up at all. You have to mentally follow the code after "fubar" and see that after the condition "if (c())" in order to mentally track the state of the braces.
Compare this to
Function Fubar
{
statement a;
do (b);
if (c())
{
performfunction(x);
}
}
(slashdot's ECODE filter sux0rs)
If you could see it, you'd notice that the braces line up. The opening and closing braces for the condition "if (c()))" are indented one more than the braces for function Fubar() which are indented more than the line "Function fubar()" itself.
Thus, you merely have to follow the indents to match the opening/closing braces. As a result of this change, I spend less than 5 minutes per week matching up braces without the need for an IDE to match them up for me.
Python seems to be a good language (I like that you can compiles sections of a Python program in c to improve performance without rewriting the whole program) but it's concepts of layout certainly carry beyond Python itself!
Sorry. I'm writing this on my X86 Linux laptop, currently booted into Win XP.
See, when I want to get some work done, I boot into Linux. But, when I'm done for the day, and am ready to slack, I boot into XP. (like now)
I'm not going to follow Windows to PPC if a port was available - why would I do so? Fedora and Debian have the best support for X86. Windows is secondary, for games and other leisure activities. (slashdot being one of them)
PPC offers nothing I'm particularly interested in. (Whoopee! Better floating point! Might matter if I gave a darn about floating point...)
This shows clearly what the real problem is. We are mining carbon from underground in the form of crude oil, and have no way of getting it back down there. Therefore we will always have a positive sum of carbon.
And you are sooo, sooo close to a corallary problem:
If we take the carbon from the ground, combine it with oxygen, then pump it back down into the ground, how do we replace the oxygen?
Seriously? Whats the difference between building a porn site and a site for any old company? As long as they're not promoting anything illegal or dangerous who cares what your clients do?
I'm a parent. Those aren't just bodies on the screen, those are people. Do some reading about the brutality and degredation of the Porn industry. Very few people earn any respect at all...
And why would you talk to your kids about it? How old are they? I could see running it by your wife but your kids. I guess we have vastly different ideas about things.
I'm a consultant; I frequently work at home. Would you want your kids looking over your shoulder when doing work of this kind?
Gosh - give me something like this for Linux, and I'll kiss some serious feet.
I've been looking for something for YEARS to replace the "Excite for Web Servers" (EWS) which could easily be cadjoled into indexing your own (Linux) computer when combined with a local copy of Apache.
It was downright AWESOME, but is no longer maintained, was based on an ANCIENT version of Perl, I've been unable to get it to work on anything beyond RedHat 6.2, and rights are not available anywhere that I've found.
My home directory is 12 GB in size, and contains work going back 6 years. Making all this searchable would just be the cat's meow...
I am a very moral person with a strict code of ethics... that can be purchased for a price when working, spam, porn, light treason, it's all the same. Thankfully I haven't had to sell myself in such a way yet.
Sometimes, you have to make a decision with no options you like.
Some time ago, I was asked to build an adult website. I would have usually just refused. But, this was a very hard decision to make. At that time, money was very tight, and the client asking this of me was one of my very best.
I accepted the project after discussing things with my wife and children. I did a good job with it, and thankfully, things improved shortly afterwards so that I no longer have to do this.
When the choice includes providing for one's family, I can easily see how "morally challenged" becomes a reality. In some cases, the real challenge is: what's more immoral?
It can also help people with severe neurological disabilities. I've a cousin who has not gotten out of her bed ever since she has been of 4 years of age, for the past 18 years. I would do anything to see her walk, so would her parents.
For that reason alone, I would like to see this work progress. Go science!:)
It can also help with diabetes. I've a son with juvenile diabetes. He has to live with the constant threat of death. He can live a long, normal life, but only with the constant pressure of regular testing and injections. He has to constantly combat depression and the understanding that his life will very possibly be shortened if he's not unrealistically careful, and will probably die a painful death.
For that reason alone, I would like to see this work progress. Go science!:)
(Technically, all SELECTS should be SELECT DISTINCT, but whatever)
Um, no.
Distinct is essentially equivalent to a "group by", and is typically used to hide or work around a failed cartesian join.
Sometimes I use "group by", when I'm trying to get a count. The following example shows student count by county. (and would usually have more clauses, to determine that we want *active* students, etc)
Select county.name as county, count(*) as count from county, students where students.county_id=county.id GROUP BY county.name ORDER BY lower(county.name) ASC
I basically never use DISTINCT. Every time I'm tempted to do so, I find that what I really have is a query not thought through properly. One of the tables in the join was not properly handled, squirelling your results.
For example:
Select a.* from a, b, c where a.b_id=b.id and a.name='bob' and c.country='USA';
It's a simple statement - but this is a failed cartesian join since the join on table c was not properly related to a or b, typically with a clause likee "and c.a_id=a.id" or something.
An urge to use distinct is generally a sure sign that you either
A) Have corrupted or hosed data in the database, or
B) Are missing a clause in your statement, resulting in a cartesian join.
When you start mixing inner and outer joins, it's easy to do!
They do this, because in return they get anyone else's improvements to their code, and they also benefit from the entire GPL community. It isn't altruism.
Absolutely. As a PHP developer, I've released numerous classes and code samples to the community, simply because
1) The code didn't offer any compelling feature that gave an advantage over potential competitors, and
2) I get improvements for free.
This combination allows me to focus on the parts that matter, rather than the "infrastructure" stuff.
I use PostgreSQL for all my DB stuff. Comparing it to MySQL is like comparing a mini-pickup to an 18-wheeler. PostgreSQL ANSI support is good, and it's very stable.
When I write custom apps (pretty much all I do) I write to the full capabilities of PostgreSQL. It's "man enough" to handle the biggest projects I'll likely ever see, and I'm not worried that the vendor will up and leave, since there isn't one.
In fact, PostgreSQL has had an interesting history in that the primary supporters of it have changed several times. PostgreSQL has weathered them all with grace, and remains today an excellent database package with a good, active community and quality developers.
So, I don't worry about JDBC, I don't write to cross platform, I could give a whit about Oracle or DB2 or whatever, but I don't. PostgreSQL is free, plenty good enough, and it won't go away.
Why bother trying to make my application portable?
PS: The article's example about null is stupid. Null = "I don't know". In that context, how could you include values of " 47" if you don't know what the value should be for a particular record?
I'm interested in this new DB language, if it actually offers a real benefit - but the article does a lousy job of getting me excited about it...
There are bacteria that can generate small amounts of hydrogen gas. If genetic engineering can make these bacteria much better at this function, we will have very good renewable energy source.
Hydrogen is a very poor source of energy - it's energy density is very low. (it takes 1/3 of the available energy in the hydrogen just to compress it to a liquid!) It's explosive. It's very inefficient.
Better to consider alge that produces bio-diesel - much denser, more compact, no expensive compression, no equipment retrofitting... the list of benefits goes on and on....
I'm wrong in that by denying the validity of so-called "intellectual property", I am making a statement that is not consistent with existing laws, and indeed, dictionary definitions
What I find very interesting is that people challenge the validity of intellectual property to the inverse degree that they have produced intellectual property.
Those that rail most against IP rights, decrying how "unfair" it all is, are, almost without exception, those that have never produced any of value.
So, based on the fact that you are (apparently) opposed to ANY form of intellectual property, I can pretty accurately surmise that you've never produced anything of value in the form of an intangible asset.
No great software, no songs worth listening to, no well-structure databases, no books or magazine articles of note.
If I'm wrong, let me know.
I would *LOVE* to hear from a real hard-hitter, producing volumes of potentially valuable IP, who is also opposed to IP rights, and who has any kind of well-reasoned arguments.
It's still not stealing, regardless of indirect negative impacts on sales. It's a crime, but it's not the theft of an object.
If you possess something you have no right to possess, the item or thing in question is stolen. It doesn't matter if it's a song, a software package, or a hammer.
It doesn't matter whether or not everybody who downloaded a cracked copy of a game actually intended to buy it. The point is, they have something that they have no right to have.
What is relevant is that the purpose of copyright, to encourage the authoring of quality works by ensuring a method of compensation, so that such works can be turned to the public interest after a limited period of time has been effectively hijacked. There is no effective limited period of time, and extensions have been applied retroactively.
Wasn't there some law somewhere about an "Ex Post Facto Law"? Oh yeah, the US Constitution! Article 1, Section 9/10!
Every time the word "steal" in this context, it is demonstrated that the speaker is ignorantly trying to apply the definition of a crime in which a possession is taken from its rightful owner against his/her will to a completely different crime, based on artificial restrictions that at least some people believe to be unjust.
And, nearly every time I hear somebody justify file-sharing, it's based on the argument that you aren't stealing anything from the owner of the media. (the CD, DVD, etc)
A typical argument is "You copy the CD, the original owner still has the CD! So, what am I stealing?".
It's stealing because if unrestricted copying was made legal, you'd "steal" the earning potential of the works in question. (software, song, movie, etc)
People don't work for nothing. Even GNU software is generally written by people who cooperate towards their own self interest. Hell, the GNU licensing system itself depends on... (did you guess it?)... copyright law!
Of course, it's convenient to bury your head in the sand, and come with with all kinds of (rediculous) arguments as to why this is not so, but that's the naked truth.
The unfortunate part is that copyright, otherwise such a good idea and one part of IP rights our government got right is being subverted by creating (effectively) unlimited terms of ownership.
That is where the copyright system is failing, and if you were actually interested in a fair system for Intellectual Property rights, that's where your attention would be.
But, attacking copyright so that you can justify downloading the latest CD is fallacious at best. It's like saying "I didn't steal it, I found it in the neighbor's garage!".
Slashdot Mirror
While slashdot has category icons, it really REALLY needs a "hero" tag, like you'd see on Fark.
This engineer that found the problem and rallied against opposition to see that this gets fixed is, in my opinion, a total hero. The world would be a much better place if more people like him were around!
I remember reading about a researcher who wanted to study genetic algorithms. I wish I had a link handy, but googling didn't turn it up.
Anyway, this guy wants to create a genetic algorithm that results in a circuit that can detect the difference between two tones, one something like 200 HZ and the other 2 KHZ.
He uses an FPGA chip to do the testing with. After a few weeks, he has an FPGA programmed such that it reliably discerns between the two input signals.
So, how does it work? Downloading the program from the FPGA chip results in a nonsensical circuit - except that it works. Running the same program on another FPGA chip of the same model results in a total failure.
Even changing the power supply makes the circuit not work! Months of study results in a complete, total unknown. Results inconclusive.
The human genome is not built of simple, engineered pieces. Interactions will occur with the total sum of possible interactions, down to the molecular level.
It will be many, many years before our own microbiological structure is understood. As we proceed, we'll see information technology and biology merge, as, when push comes to shove, both consist of the replication of complex patterns.
I don't want to think about how much time this has saved!
I've been coding for some time very extensively using PHP. It, along with GTK is a good, high-level language that lets me get lots done, very quickly.
In many cases, it will accomodate common errors, such as strings not being quoted, etc seemingly without complaint.
However, I recently changed my strategy to one of "zero tolerance", which entailed me reducing the error reporting threshold to 0 (all errors) as well as defining a standardized error handler callback function. I spent about a month just going thru the existing codebase to quote all the strings, etc.
However, now having done paid that price, I'm quite surprised at how often bugs that would have previously gone un-noticed pop out in clear view.
Undefined variables previously translated to equal false now stand out as a mis-spelling. Database errors previously un-noticed suddenly highlighted and shown to me. Hiccups in the code previously shown to users now archived and hidden away so that I see them instead.
It's made a HUGE difference - I'm more productive despite the appearance of having more to look out for!
I also have a generic error() function defined that's really a wrapper for the error handler - so the error logging system now in place works for language errors and logic errors alike.
It's awesome!
The Microsoft .NET Framework and SDK are free.
The Microsoft C# compiler is free.
The Microsoft VB.NET compiler is free.
The Microsoft C compiler is free.
The Microsoft C++ compiler is free.
A Microsoft WebForm IDE is free (WebMatrix)
Free as in Beer. Find a bug in VB.NET compiler? Good luck fixing it....
PS: Ever wonder about the Intellectual Property of Beer producers? Their secret recipes and whatnot? Would they be offended by "Free as in beer"? Funny though, that.
I'm one of those people that live on the 'net. I have a nice, Dell, linux laptop. I write software for use on the 'net.
I'm not only one of those people who don't know if "redundant failover" is a standard English term, my wife doesn't know either.
I've never had a PDA. I've played a few times, but they seem like a pain in the rear. I've found that $0.15 at the local Target/Wal-Mart does just fine in the form of a spiral-bound notebook, and I don't have to worry about battteries, either.
I've played with them PDA things. They're neat. But, drop one sometime on the beach, so that the sand gets into them. Or, have a battery go dead.
Sorry, what I write down is more important than that. If I write it on the server, or on my laptop, it gets backed up automatically every night. If I write it on a notebook, it's pretty safe. (I have a running record of $0.25 notebook notes going back almost 4 years)
So, where's the compelling advantage? Why don't they offer a backup service for a few dollars per month?
If my phone dies, I shouldn't have to reload the contact list, and anything saved on the phone should be available on the new phone. Until that happens, I'm going go focus on good reception and not pay much attention to anything else. What's the point?
I have a Dell Inspiron 600m. While not as Linux-compatable as I would have liked, I've been able to get ATI Mobile M9 video system in it to run alongside my 19" CRT in a "dual head" configuration, even with different resolution monitors as a single desktop.
Until you've done it, you just can't really comment.
When I get into heavy coding, nothing beats having two monitors. Typically, I'll have my Fedora Core desktop running, VMWare running in a window with whatever O/S inside that (frequently Win2000), 6 or so xterms, and a few Mozilla windows, all at once.
Trying to get this to fly with just one monitor is quite difficult and requires very careful attention to the location of overlapping windows so I can switch between them easily.
But, with two monitors, 6 virtual desktops, and an ergo keyboard, I find that I can just FLY, unencumbered.
BTW, I've posted my XF86Config file for your use and tweaking if it should prove useful for you. To use dual-head, I start Xwindows with "startx -- -layout multiple". (I boot into runlevel 3)
When I "go remote" I really, REALLY miss my extra screen real-estate!
I'm an independant consultant/programmer. My job is about 1/3 programmer, 1/3 salesman, and 1/3 workflow analyst.
I'm in no danger of losing my contracts anytime soon. From where I sit, the biggest problem programmers et al have with their respective client businesses is lack of understanding of the real needs of the end customer.
Take the time to get to really, REALLY know your target audience. Listen - long and hard, become familiar with their terminology, their concerns, their worries. Get in their minds, become, as much as you can, THEM. Wash, rinse, repeat.
Many people almost don't know what to think when somebody really, truly listens to them. Sometimes they're taken aback - but they always love it. And, when you deliver the exact solution to their needs, (even late) they will kiss your feet.
One big problem is humility - how many programmers figure they're work 6 figures, and the customer is a necessary evil? When, in fact, the customer is the point?
Python caused me to change my layout for code, almost instantly eliminating a big problem with c-like code: the missing brace.
Most code is structured like this:In this small segment, notice that there are to sets of braces - and they don't line up at all. You have to mentally follow the code after "fubar" and see that after the condition "if (c())" in order to mentally track the state of the braces.
Compare this to
(slashdot's ECODE filter sux0rs)
If you could see it, you'd notice that the braces line up. The opening and closing braces for the condition "if (c()))" are indented one more than the braces for function Fubar() which are indented more than the line "Function fubar()" itself.
Thus, you merely have to follow the indents to match the opening/closing braces. As a result of this change, I spend less than 5 minutes per week matching up braces without the need for an IDE to match them up for me.
Python seems to be a good language (I like that you can compiles sections of a Python program in c to improve performance without rewriting the whole program) but it's concepts of layout certainly carry beyond Python itself!
Sorry. I'm writing this on my X86 Linux laptop, currently booted into Win XP.
See, when I want to get some work done, I boot into Linux. But, when I'm done for the day, and am ready to slack, I boot into XP. (like now)
I'm not going to follow Windows to PPC if a port was available - why would I do so? Fedora and Debian have the best support for X86. Windows is secondary, for games and other leisure activities. (slashdot being one of them)
PPC offers nothing I'm particularly interested in. (Whoopee! Better floating point! Might matter if I gave a darn about floating point...)
If we take the carbon from the ground, combine it with oxygen, then pump it back down into the ground, how do we replace the oxygen?
Gosh - give me something like this for Linux, and I'll kiss some serious feet.
I've been looking for something for YEARS to replace the "Excite for Web Servers" (EWS) which could easily be cadjoled into indexing your own (Linux) computer when combined with a local copy of Apache.
It was downright AWESOME, but is no longer maintained, was based on an ANCIENT version of Perl, I've been unable to get it to work on anything beyond RedHat 6.2, and rights are not available anywhere that I've found.
My home directory is 12 GB in size, and contains work going back 6 years. Making all this searchable would just be the cat's meow...
I am a very moral person with a strict code of ethics... that can be purchased for a price when working, spam, porn, light treason, it's all the same. Thankfully I haven't had to sell myself in such a way yet.
Sometimes, you have to make a decision with no options you like.
Some time ago, I was asked to build an adult website. I would have usually just refused. But, this was a very hard decision to make. At that time, money was very tight, and the client asking this of me was one of my very best.
I accepted the project after discussing things with my wife and children. I did a good job with it, and thankfully, things improved shortly afterwards so that I no longer have to do this.
When the choice includes providing for one's family, I can easily see how "morally challenged" becomes a reality. In some cases, the real challenge is: what's more immoral?
It can also help people with severe neurological disabilities. I've a cousin who has not gotten out of her bed ever since she has been of 4 years of age, for the past 18 years. I would do anything to see her walk, so would her parents.
:)
:)
For that reason alone, I would like to see this work progress. Go science!
It can also help with diabetes. I've a son with juvenile diabetes. He has to live with the constant threat of death. He can live a long, normal life, but only with the constant pressure of regular testing and injections. He has to constantly combat depression and the understanding that his life will very possibly be shortened if he's not unrealistically careful, and will probably die a painful death.
For that reason alone, I would like to see this work progress. Go science!
Realize that more human "life" is destroyed when you pull out a single hair by its root than we're talking about here!
PS: Vote Kerry!
Human cloning is scary stuff.
I live with two clones - my identical twin sons. Funny, they SEEM like different people.
And they're scary, but only because they act like 15 year olds typically do....
Um, no.
Distinct is essentially equivalent to a "group by", and is typically used to hide or work around a failed cartesian join.
Sometimes I use "group by", when I'm trying to get a count. The following example shows student count by county. (and would usually have more clauses, to determine that we want *active* students, etc)I basically never use DISTINCT. Every time I'm tempted to do so, I find that what I really have is a query not thought through properly. One of the tables in the join was not properly handled, squirelling your results.
For example:It's a simple statement - but this is a failed cartesian join since the join on table c was not properly related to a or b, typically with a clause likee "and c.a_id=a.id" or something.
An urge to use distinct is generally a sure sign that you either
A) Have corrupted or hosed data in the database, or
B) Are missing a clause in your statement, resulting in a cartesian join.
When you start mixing inner and outer joins, it's easy to do!
They do this, because in return they get anyone else's improvements to their code, and they also benefit from the entire GPL community. It isn't altruism.
Absolutely. As a PHP developer, I've released numerous classes and code samples to the community, simply because
1) The code didn't offer any compelling feature that gave an advantage over potential competitors, and
2) I get improvements for free.
This combination allows me to focus on the parts that matter, rather than the "infrastructure" stuff.
I use PostgreSQL for all my DB stuff. Comparing it to MySQL is like comparing a mini-pickup to an 18-wheeler. PostgreSQL ANSI support is good, and it's very stable.
When I write custom apps (pretty much all I do) I write to the full capabilities of PostgreSQL. It's "man enough" to handle the biggest projects I'll likely ever see, and I'm not worried that the vendor will up and leave, since there isn't one.
In fact, PostgreSQL has had an interesting history in that the primary supporters of it have changed several times. PostgreSQL has weathered them all with grace, and remains today an excellent database package with a good, active community and quality developers.
So, I don't worry about JDBC, I don't write to cross platform, I could give a whit about Oracle or DB2 or whatever, but I don't. PostgreSQL is free, plenty good enough, and it won't go away.
Why bother trying to make my application portable?
PS: The article's example about null is stupid. Null = "I don't know". In that context, how could you include values of " 47" if you don't know what the value should be for a particular record?
I'm interested in this new DB language, if it actually offers a real benefit - but the article does a lousy job of getting me excited about it...
Even worse, I've seen the code that GENERATES these horrendous queries. It's like seeing your parents having sex; it changes your life forever.
Amen, I HEAR you, brother!
I've had to write "dynamically generated" queries - and they are a TOTAL MESS, with lots of crappy if statements and string appends...
300 lines of code to properly parse a search page response, to generate a 20-line query that executes against 5 tables.
Ugh.
There are bacteria that can generate small amounts of hydrogen gas. If genetic engineering can make these bacteria much better at this function, we will have very good renewable energy source.
Hydrogen is a very poor source of energy - it's energy density is very low. (it takes 1/3 of the available energy in the hydrogen just to compress it to a liquid!) It's explosive. It's very inefficient.
Better to consider alge that produces bio-diesel - much denser, more compact, no expensive compression, no equipment retrofitting... the list of benefits goes on and on....
I'm wrong in that by denying the validity of so-called "intellectual property", I am making a statement that is not consistent with existing laws, and indeed, dictionary definitions
What I find very interesting is that people challenge the validity of intellectual property to the inverse degree that they have produced intellectual property.
Those that rail most against IP rights, decrying how "unfair" it all is, are, almost without exception, those that have never produced any of value.
So, based on the fact that you are (apparently) opposed to ANY form of intellectual property, I can pretty accurately surmise that you've never produced anything of value in the form of an intangible asset.
No great software, no songs worth listening to, no well-structure databases, no books or magazine articles of note.
If I'm wrong, let me know.
I would *LOVE* to hear from a real hard-hitter, producing volumes of potentially valuable IP, who is also opposed to IP rights, and who has any kind of well-reasoned arguments.
Otherwise, you're just a whiner.
If you possess something you have no right to possess, the item or thing in question is stolen. It doesn't matter if it's a song, a software package, or a hammer.
Steal: To take (the property of another) without right or permission.
I can almost hear you say it... But intellectual property isn't really property!
Wrong again: " Something tangible or intangible to which its owner has legal title: properties such as copyrights and trademarks."
It doesn't matter whether or not everybody who downloaded a cracked copy of a game actually intended to buy it. The point is, they have something that they have no right to have.
What is relevant is that the purpose of copyright, to encourage the authoring of quality works by ensuring a method of compensation, so that such works can be turned to the public interest after a limited period of time has been effectively hijacked. There is no effective limited period of time, and extensions have been applied retroactively.
Wasn't there some law somewhere about an "Ex Post Facto Law"? Oh yeah, the US Constitution! Article 1, Section 9/10!
Every time the word "steal" in this context, it is demonstrated that the speaker is ignorantly trying to apply the definition of a crime in which a possession is taken from its rightful owner against his/her will to a completely different crime, based on artificial restrictions that at least some people believe to be unjust.
And, nearly every time I hear somebody justify file-sharing, it's based on the argument that you aren't stealing anything from the owner of the media. (the CD, DVD, etc)
A typical argument is "You copy the CD, the original owner still has the CD! So, what am I stealing?".
It's stealing because if unrestricted copying was made legal, you'd "steal" the earning potential of the works in question. (software, song, movie, etc)
People don't work for nothing. Even GNU software is generally written by people who cooperate towards their own self interest. Hell, the GNU licensing system itself depends on... (did you guess it?)... copyright law!
Of course, it's convenient to bury your head in the sand, and come with with all kinds of (rediculous) arguments as to why this is not so, but that's the naked truth.
The unfortunate part is that copyright, otherwise such a good idea and one part of IP rights our government got right is being subverted by creating (effectively) unlimited terms of ownership.
That is where the copyright system is failing, and if you were actually interested in a fair system for Intellectual Property rights, that's where your attention would be.
But, attacking copyright so that you can justify downloading the latest CD is fallacious at best. It's like saying "I didn't steal it, I found it in the neighbor's garage!".