When i was in college, there was a CD store in nearby Northampton that sold bootlegged recordings of live shows. Most of these were legit, since the bands were ones that allowed it (Grateful Dead, Phish, etc). But I recall that there was a big commotion about Dave Matthews Band, which was the most popular college music at the time (circa 1996), coming down with a stampede of lawyers and hunting out indie record stores selling bootlegged live DMB recordings.
This isn't a commentary on whether it's right or wrong, just that record companies and artists have cracked down on retailers before, and they'll probably do it again.
PS: For years, music stores that sold used CDs weren't given any promotional material from the recording companies (even if the store sold new ones as well) because obviously used CD sales don't help the companies any. But this must have changed, as the big New England chain Newbury Comics is indeed selling used CDs...
Is there an abridged version of the 3rd edition that only has the changes? I am just now finishing the TIJ 2nd Edition, which I purchased in hardcopy because I found the first three chapters (which I read from the free download) to be extremely informative and enlightening.
Yes, it's taken me months to get through the thousand pages in this book (i have a full time job and a life, so no, I didn't finish it in a few weeks), but I'd like to read the things he's added to the 3rd edition.
Maybe my threshold is set too high, but I'm surprised more people haven't talked about paper planners. I use a Franklin planner and I love it. I started using it in college and still do. No handwriting recognition tricks, plenty of space to take notes for the day (need more space? add an extra page, it's not that hard), a to-do list that forces you to be aware of your to-dos because forwarding them up a day requires you to re-copy them by hand...
While I admit it would be nice to have the data in electronic format to easily transfer to other uses, I don't really feel the need to invest in a PDA. It just seems to inconvenient. And I'm no luddite, I couldn't live without my cell phone, which stores the phone numbers I need and I like to use. Though I'd like to get one of those Java-enabled phones and play with that a bit...
Oh, and for those who said they like to use the PDA as a gameboy: I don't dispute this use, but I have a gameboy advance (and I'm 26 and unashamed) and use it all the time. There is no comparison for the games -- they are great. No, I can't pull it out in meetings, but it's not like people don't know when you're playing PDA games.......
For the complicated applications people are trying to shove on the web, we need a new solution. Something in between a standalone fat application, and completely server-rendered pages (web). Something like cURL, or XULUX, or (choke) XUL + scripting glue.
Yeah! They should develop something like that -- it wouldn't quite be a full application, but would have a lot more to offer than the standard web browser feature set. They could call it an applet or something.
They are probably making a reference to the fact that the two youths belonged to the same biker gang, for all intents and purposes making them "brothers" (esp when you consider that they also both came from the same orphanage).
You must be trolling. The soundtrack to Akira is the first CD I ever bought, after seeing the movie as a 14-year old in 1992. I had to special order it because the movie wasn't popular enough to see this CD in stores yet.
Have you really listened to it? It's amazing. The choral music produced by Genoh Yamashirogumi is unlike anything I have ever heard anywhere else. Otomo heard another of their CDs and asked the group if they would do his soundtrack, practically begging -- he said that even if they didn't want to come up with something new, he wanted to use their existing music at least (instead).
Actually, the disjointed storyline in the movie was a result of it being made before the manga series was actually finished. Otomo didn't want to completely ruin the story for his loyal manga readers, so he made some alterations.
But yes, you are right that the story of Akira is far too big for even a 3-hr movie, and it does try to encapsulate a lot of what happens.
Note to anyone who liked the movie -- Dark Horse recently re-released the original black and white comics in 6 large paperback collection volumes. The story from the comic blows the story from the movie out of the water. Highly recommended.
As far as stopping piracy is concerned, Bon Jovi's performance in Times Square during that first football game pretty much ensured that I wouldn't be pirating this album... the song is terrible.
Would you use a honeypot (...) if you had to have a framed banner ad at the top of every page you visited while on the network?
By "framed banner", are you referring to frames in HTML? Because if so, it would take me about three minutes to whip up a JavaScript bookmarklet that I could stick in my toolbar to override/close those frames. And Mozilla provides an easy way to block ads (by refusing graphics files from sites other than the requested domain).
(Yes, I know that JS cannot be used to actually close an individual frame, but just grab the contents of the "good" frame and open a new window with just those contents, etc... pretty limitless what you can do.)
So how do you go about it? I'm asking this question in earnest -- I've written web apps with JavaScript/CSS/(X)HTML/PHP/Perl/Python, but I've never done any desktop development. This sounds like a great way to distribute desktop software for people who don't know C++ or Java. But I'm not exactly clear on how you would write a program that takes advantage of Mozilla as a platform. Is it just a local file that the user accesses from the URI bar?
Anyone know of any good references on writing these kinds of plug-in programs?
I work nights, and I would kill for a program that would let me create events that, for example, start at 6:00 pm on one day, and end at 6:00 am on the next, without having to resort to the ugly hack of splitting the event into chunks, so it avoids that unbreakable midnight barrier.
Not only that, but you can't view any events that are later than 7:00pm in "Daily" or "Weekly" view modes! WTF is that?? (You can schedule them with the palette but then they disappear to the bottom of the window, out of sight.)
The real cruelty is that it looks like there's a space for a scroll bar on the right side of the window (probably put there by the windowing API), but there is no scroll bar to use to scroll down. Enlarging the window has no effect either, it just stretches the currently-viewable area so that >7:00 events are still out of sight. I'm guessing that this is a bug, and I sincerely hope that a patch is released soon.
While TextEdit does let you edit text (better than Word, for instance), it's not quite on the same playing field as any of the code editors such as BBEdit, Pepper, vi, or emacs. TextEdit is really just a SimpleText for Mac OS X*. The fact that the default setting for new documents is Rich Text Format is very telling (who wants to write code in Rich Text?).
* (why don't doc-writers just save their stuff as PDFs and let people open them in Preview?)
let me get rid off those horizontal gray stripes and the chewing-gum Dock.
10.2 got rid of the stripes and you've always had the ability to turn off the bouncing applications (System Preferences: Dock: Animate Opening Applications).
Apparently a single tank can withstand multiple (10 or more) hits from a RPG when this system is in use, which hopefully will cut down on the threat!
Admittedly I don't know the first thing about armaments or artillery, but how long until RPGs are made with non-conductive cores? This only works when the core is "fried" as it bridges the connection between two charged "leads".
It is in fact so entrenched now that it's a bit of a *problem* to do even minor tweaks to enhance OOP itself, such as method(object,arg,arg) instead of object.method(arg,arg) in order to better support multiple dispatch, since it looks too much like non-OO code, regardless of the scoping of the actual implementations of method.
I realize this is totally off topic, but I was wondering if you could point to a resource that discusses this "method(object,arg,arg)" concept. I've never seen it before.
We also acknowledge that it has its flaws -- and there are plenty -- but many of these can be avoided if you use a tool that doesn't insist on a purely OO approach (and frequently one that ignores half of OO as well, such as certain popular mainstream programming languages today).
It would be enlightening to others following this thread if you could cite some specific examples of where OS X borrows heavily from Windows.
Don't get me wrong -- I'm a mac OS X die-hard user. BUT... the original poster is correct. I can't remember where I read it, but when OS X first came out I read an article discussing some of the similarities between OS X and Windows. It's all in the usability and ergonomics, not the technical specs as you write.
For one, OS 9 was designed to have the "close" button on the opposite side of a window as the "resize/enlarge" button, so that a user wouldn't accidentally click the "close" button. But in OS X they have reverted to the Windows-style of having all three buttons (red, yellow, and green) right next to each other.
Also, the dock is a blatant replacement for the Taskbar. Yeah, it's more useful and yeah I use it all the time, but this feature was popularized by Windows.
Shit, I can't remember and it's late and I'm tired, but there was actually quite a few things in OS X's interface design that were clearly designed based on Windows features. Do a Google Search for interface design or something. All I remember is that most of it had to do with the layout of the windowing system and the desktop itself (in the Finder).
You can never make these sorts of assumptions based on the "feel" of a trailer, because often different trailers will be crafted with different moods and "feel"s. For instance, Home Alone was first marketed as a slapstick/comedy with goofy scenes of Caulkin running around with two thugs in the house, setting traps and such. After the movie went gangbusters in theaters, a second trailer was released that showed almost exclusively "touching" and "human" scenes with Caulkin missing his mom and family, her desperate attempts to return home to save him, and his non-action experiences in the movie (such as running the house for himself, walking around town, etc).
Each of these trailers could have been for an entirely different movie, but they were really one and the same Home Alone. Often the earliest trailers for a film will be somewhat mysterious, with only hints about what the film will be about, then there will be the action-style "summer blockbuster" trailer, and then eventually if the movie does well a trailer will come out that pitches the movie as more intelligent than just action/explosions. None of these really tell you much about the movie's story, though.
Think this is bad now? Try living under a real king, who can kill you just on a whim. Corporate politics are a light cold compared to the absolute void that we might find if the government wasn't restrained as it.
That's the whole point of all of this. If people fail to assert their rights and ensure that the government does its job of protecting them, things could go back to situations resembling what you have just described.
I find that dictionaries (associative arrays) work just fine. Some languages even use a dot instead of (or in addition to) square brackets.
Yes, JavaScript has a similar feature.
(* Then, if you find that you need to add some kind of feature or behavior to objects of this class, isn't it easier to add it to the class definition (so that it is available throughout the code, wherever the object instance appears) *)
How is that better than a function?
Well, for one thing it doesn't clutter the global namespace with yet another function name. (I don't mean "true" global, but it will need to be global to any place where you wish to use this function.)
recordHandle.newBehavior()// OOP
newBehavior(recordHandle)// Function call
If you get into more complex data structures, then it can become tedious to keep track of where all of this data is stored: "which array is holding data X, where is data Y coming from". I can see arguments that this isn't that important, from the standpoint of someone who's really really organized but I guess I'm not -- I like being able to refer to an object's attributes from within its methods without having to pass them in as parameters, or (gack) using global variables.
OOP killed table innovation implementation.
I can understand what you mean, even though I like OOP. But, then, that doesn't mean that people such as yourself can't continue to develop (and promote) procedural programming methodologies and technologies. Which, I suppose, is exactly what you're doing. In any event, thanks at least for clarifying your perspective to me somewhat via this thread, although I may not agree.
it does not attempt to use code structures to model entities (nouns) and noun/entity relationships. I relies on the database for those, and (good) databases make virtual, local, and relativistic "noun views" easier than OOP. OOP tends to hard-wire them into code, which is more rigid than using relational and boolean formulas IMO.
If you can write code that manages data exclusively via the database, such that it never needs to manifest in the code itself (as an object or, entity, or whatever), then why not just create an instance of an object to represent that record? It doesn't have to be a big, bloated class definition, just a simple thing that you can then use as a reference in your code. Then, if you find that you need to add some kind of feature or behavior to objects of this class, isn't it easier to add it to the class definition (so that it is available throughout the code, wherever the object instance appears) than to have to write a function or some kind of behavior into the application code itself?
I understand what you're saying, and as a back-end web programmer I also kept all of my entity information in the database. But when I needed a new behavior available, I found that it was easier to provide this as a method of the class rather than try to fit it into the procedural parts of my code. Plus, I could always write a new class to aggregate other classes if I needed features of an already-existing class but wanted to expand on those (or I could just use inheritance, but this is more limiting).
At some point, the data needs to be used directly by the code, so flexible data structures such as objects come in handy (rather than cumbersome things like hashes-of-hashes). That's my opinion.
(PS: thanks for responding and not flaming, I am genuinely interested in your perspective, even if I don't agree)
Slashdot Mirror
When i was in college, there was a CD store in nearby Northampton that sold bootlegged recordings of live shows. Most of these were legit, since the bands were ones that allowed it (Grateful Dead, Phish, etc). But I recall that there was a big commotion about Dave Matthews Band, which was the most popular college music at the time (circa 1996), coming down with a stampede of lawyers and hunting out indie record stores selling bootlegged live DMB recordings.
This isn't a commentary on whether it's right or wrong, just that record companies and artists have cracked down on retailers before, and they'll probably do it again.
PS: For years, music stores that sold used CDs weren't given any promotional material from the recording companies (even if the store sold new ones as well) because obviously used CD sales don't help the companies any. But this must have changed, as the big New England chain Newbury Comics is indeed selling used CDs...
Is there an abridged version of the 3rd edition that only has the changes? I am just now finishing the TIJ 2nd Edition, which I purchased in hardcopy because I found the first three chapters (which I read from the free download) to be extremely informative and enlightening.
Yes, it's taken me months to get through the thousand pages in this book (i have a full time job and a life, so no, I didn't finish it in a few weeks), but I'd like to read the things he's added to the 3rd edition.
Yet I had to reject four cookies just to read the article.
Maybe my threshold is set too high, but I'm surprised more people haven't talked about paper planners. I use a Franklin planner and I love it. I started using it in college and still do. No handwriting recognition tricks, plenty of space to take notes for the day (need more space? add an extra page, it's not that hard), a to-do list that forces you to be aware of your to-dos because forwarding them up a day requires you to re-copy them by hand...
While I admit it would be nice to have the data in electronic format to easily transfer to other uses, I don't really feel the need to invest in a PDA. It just seems to inconvenient. And I'm no luddite, I couldn't live without my cell phone, which stores the phone numbers I need and I like to use. Though I'd like to get one of those Java-enabled phones and play with that a bit...
Oh, and for those who said they like to use the PDA as a gameboy: I don't dispute this use, but I have a gameboy advance (and I'm 26 and unashamed) and use it all the time. There is no comparison for the games -- they are great. No, I can't pull it out in meetings, but it's not like people don't know when you're playing PDA games.......
In the interview she did admit that it was free food which drew her to the film studio.
It says that the site was built with MySQL-XML. Does MySQL-XML eat punctuation or something?
For the complicated applications people are trying to shove on the web, we need a new solution. Something in between a standalone fat application, and completely server-rendered pages (web). Something like cURL, or XULUX, or (choke) XUL + scripting glue.
Yeah! They should develop something like that -- it wouldn't quite be a full application, but would have a lot more to offer than the standard web browser feature set. They could call it an applet or something.
They are probably making a reference to the fact that the two youths belonged to the same biker gang, for all intents and purposes making them "brothers" (esp when you consider that they also both came from the same orphanage).
He'd be perfect for the corrupt politician Nezu.
Sorry that this post won't make much sense if you haven't seen the movie or read the manga.
(After thinking about it for a moment, he wouldn't be perfect, but Nezu is kind of short.)
You must be trolling. The soundtrack to Akira is the first CD I ever bought, after seeing the movie as a 14-year old in 1992. I had to special order it because the movie wasn't popular enough to see this CD in stores yet.
Have you really listened to it? It's amazing. The choral music produced by Genoh Yamashirogumi is unlike anything I have ever heard anywhere else. Otomo heard another of their CDs and asked the group if they would do his soundtrack, practically begging -- he said that even if they didn't want to come up with something new, he wanted to use their existing music at least (instead).
Really, check it out. It's excellent.
Actually, the disjointed storyline in the movie was a result of it being made before the manga series was actually finished. Otomo didn't want to completely ruin the story for his loyal manga readers, so he made some alterations.
But yes, you are right that the story of Akira is far too big for even a 3-hr movie, and it does try to encapsulate a lot of what happens.
Note to anyone who liked the movie -- Dark Horse recently re-released the original black and white comics in 6 large paperback collection volumes. The story from the comic blows the story from the movie out of the water. Highly recommended.
As far as stopping piracy is concerned, Bon Jovi's performance in Times Square during that first football game pretty much ensured that I wouldn't be pirating this album ... the song is terrible.
Would you use a honeypot (...) if you had to have a framed banner ad at the top of every page you visited while on the network?
By "framed banner", are you referring to frames in HTML? Because if so, it would take me about three minutes to whip up a JavaScript bookmarklet that I could stick in my toolbar to override/close those frames. And Mozilla provides an easy way to block ads (by refusing graphics files from sites other than the requested domain).
(Yes, I know that JS cannot be used to actually close an individual frame, but just grab the contents of the "good" frame and open a new window with just those contents, etc... pretty limitless what you can do.)
So how do you go about it? I'm asking this question in earnest -- I've written web apps with JavaScript/CSS/(X)HTML/PHP/Perl/Python, but I've never done any desktop development. This sounds like a great way to distribute desktop software for people who don't know C++ or Java. But I'm not exactly clear on how you would write a program that takes advantage of Mozilla as a platform. Is it just a local file that the user accesses from the URI bar?
Anyone know of any good references on writing these kinds of plug-in programs?
I work nights, and I would kill for a program that would let me create events that, for example, start at 6:00 pm on one day, and end at 6:00 am on the next, without having to resort to the ugly hack of splitting the event into chunks, so it avoids that unbreakable midnight barrier.
Not only that, but you can't view any events that are later than 7:00pm in "Daily" or "Weekly" view modes! WTF is that?? (You can schedule them with the palette but then they disappear to the bottom of the window, out of sight.)
The real cruelty is that it looks like there's a space for a scroll bar on the right side of the window (probably put there by the windowing API), but there is no scroll bar to use to scroll down. Enlarging the window has no effect either, it just stretches the currently-viewable area so that >7:00 events are still out of sight. I'm guessing that this is a bug, and I sincerely hope that a patch is released soon.
It comes free with Jaguar. Its called TextEdit.
While TextEdit does let you edit text (better than Word, for instance), it's not quite on the same playing field as any of the code editors such as BBEdit, Pepper, vi, or emacs. TextEdit is really just a SimpleText for Mac OS X*. The fact that the default setting for new documents is Rich Text Format is very telling (who wants to write code in Rich Text?).
* (why don't doc-writers just save their stuff as PDFs and let people open them in Preview?)
let me get rid off those horizontal gray stripes and the chewing-gum Dock.
10.2 got rid of the stripes and you've always had the ability to turn off the bouncing applications (System Preferences: Dock: Animate Opening Applications).
Apparently a single tank can withstand multiple (10 or more) hits from a RPG when this system is in use, which hopefully will cut down on the threat!
Admittedly I don't know the first thing about armaments or artillery, but how long until RPGs are made with non-conductive cores? This only works when the core is "fried" as it bridges the connection between two charged "leads".
It is in fact so entrenched now that it's a bit of a *problem* to do even minor tweaks to enhance OOP itself, such as method(object,arg,arg) instead of object.method(arg,arg) in order to better support multiple dispatch, since it looks too much like non-OO code, regardless of the scoping of the actual implementations of method.
I realize this is totally off topic, but I was wondering if you could point to a resource that discusses this "method(object,arg,arg)" concept. I've never seen it before.
Thanks.
We also acknowledge that it has its flaws -- and there are plenty -- but many of these can be avoided if you use a tool that doesn't insist on a purely OO approach (and frequently one that ignores half of OO as well, such as certain popular mainstream programming languages today).
Sounds like Python.
It would be enlightening to others following this thread if you could cite some specific examples of where OS X borrows heavily from Windows.
Don't get me wrong -- I'm a mac OS X die-hard user. BUT... the original poster is correct. I can't remember where I read it, but when OS X first came out I read an article discussing some of the similarities between OS X and Windows. It's all in the usability and ergonomics, not the technical specs as you write.
You can never make these sorts of assumptions based on the "feel" of a trailer, because often different trailers will be crafted with different moods and "feel"s. For instance, Home Alone was first marketed as a slapstick/comedy with goofy scenes of Caulkin running around with two thugs in the house, setting traps and such. After the movie went gangbusters in theaters, a second trailer was released that showed almost exclusively "touching" and "human" scenes with Caulkin missing his mom and family, her desperate attempts to return home to save him, and his non-action experiences in the movie (such as running the house for himself, walking around town, etc).
Each of these trailers could have been for an entirely different movie, but they were really one and the same Home Alone. Often the earliest trailers for a film will be somewhat mysterious, with only hints about what the film will be about, then there will be the action-style "summer blockbuster" trailer, and then eventually if the movie does well a trailer will come out that pitches the movie as more intelligent than just action/explosions. None of these really tell you much about the movie's story, though.
Think this is bad now? Try living under a real king, who can kill you just on a whim. Corporate politics are a light cold compared to the absolute void that we might find if the government wasn't restrained as it.
That's the whole point of all of this. If people fail to assert their rights and ensure that the government does its job of protecting them, things could go back to situations resembling what you have just described.
I find that dictionaries (associative arrays) work just fine. Some languages even use a dot instead of (or in addition to) square brackets.
Yes, JavaScript has a similar feature.
(* Then, if you find that you need to add some kind of feature or behavior to objects of this class, isn't it easier to add it to the class definition (so that it is available throughout the code, wherever the object instance appears) *)
How is that better than a function?
Well, for one thing it doesn't clutter the global namespace with yet another function name. (I don't mean "true" global, but it will need to be global to any place where you wish to use this function.)
recordHandle.newBehavior() // OOP
newBehavior(recordHandle) // Function call
If you get into more complex data structures, then it can become tedious to keep track of where all of this data is stored: "which array is holding data X, where is data Y coming from". I can see arguments that this isn't that important, from the standpoint of someone who's really really organized but I guess I'm not -- I like being able to refer to an object's attributes from within its methods without having to pass them in as parameters, or (gack) using global variables.
OOP killed table innovation implementation.
I can understand what you mean, even though I like OOP. But, then, that doesn't mean that people such as yourself can't continue to develop (and promote) procedural programming methodologies and technologies. Which, I suppose, is exactly what you're doing. In any event, thanks at least for clarifying your perspective to me somewhat via this thread, although I may not agree.
it does not attempt to use code structures to model entities (nouns) and noun/entity relationships. I relies on the database for those, and (good) databases make virtual, local, and relativistic "noun views" easier than OOP. OOP tends to hard-wire them into code, which is more rigid than using relational and boolean formulas IMO.
If you can write code that manages data exclusively via the database, such that it never needs to manifest in the code itself (as an object or, entity, or whatever), then why not just create an instance of an object to represent that record? It doesn't have to be a big, bloated class definition, just a simple thing that you can then use as a reference in your code. Then, if you find that you need to add some kind of feature or behavior to objects of this class, isn't it easier to add it to the class definition (so that it is available throughout the code, wherever the object instance appears) than to have to write a function or some kind of behavior into the application code itself?
I understand what you're saying, and as a back-end web programmer I also kept all of my entity information in the database. But when I needed a new behavior available, I found that it was easier to provide this as a method of the class rather than try to fit it into the procedural parts of my code. Plus, I could always write a new class to aggregate other classes if I needed features of an already-existing class but wanted to expand on those (or I could just use inheritance, but this is more limiting).
At some point, the data needs to be used directly by the code, so flexible data structures such as objects come in handy (rather than cumbersome things like hashes-of-hashes). That's my opinion.
(PS: thanks for responding and not flaming, I am genuinely interested in your perspective, even if I don't agree)