Could we "cloak" spaces and matter from any interaction with our universe, not just electromagnetic?
It's already been done. But you don't even have to cloak gravitons. What do you think all that dark matter is? It's intersolar sprawl, and the aliens use the cloaking so that we don't keep bothering them, asking for technology.
Does the phone company have the liability exposure for any child a predator calls on the phone? Does the US postal service have the liability exposure for any letter a predator sends to a child?
As a software engineer with a particular passion for physics, I can understand your sentiments. But, at least for psychology, it is my understanding that respectable institutes are now (in the past decade or two) demanding proper statistical treatement of their research.
I work in IT. I don't work long hours. If you do, you should find another job, then quit your current job and TELL YOUR BOSS IT WAS BECAUSE HE OVERWORKED YOU. If everyone did likewise, companies with bad management (like yours) would be punished until they shape up.
If this is the way this guy plans to gather his statistics, he will be laughed out of school. This wouldn't even cut it for undergrad!
If his thesis is "people in career X are statistically more likely to experience divorce than the cross-vocational average," then he needs to start gathering public records on divorce and start doing the math.
It sounds like the submitter is looking for hugs, not data.
Your point makes it clear that computer translation can't be solved with a few good algorithms. However, I still think it can be solved with good algorithms and a HUGE DATABASE of phrases. Such a thing would likely need to be trained extensively, and require a fantastic amount of storage, but it seems very possible.
I imagine scene where government contractors take their computer home, sit down, and watch TV with it, correcting it when it picks the wrong meaning for ambiguous phrases.
You are correct. Every operating system since the dawn of time has had the goal of making maximum use of hardware. Windows is the only OS designed to do the opposite: make your hardware less useful than it could be.
If you mouth off about someone, you had better make sure you can prove you're telling the truth and be prepared to do so in a court of law.
It is my understanding that, in the US, the person sueing you has to prove you lied to have any chance at winning a libel/slander case.
You can say anything you want about anyone, as long as it is true. You don't have to prove shit, the people doing the sueing are responsible for all the proof.
Modern software is complex enough that simply having the source code for a component does not necessarily mean a person (even a skilled coder) can maintain that component.
Such ideas made more sense 15 years ago, but not today.
People who got in to CS through math like the lispy stuff. Yeah, that's not practical.
But I just want to be one of the millions who say Ruby and Python are what Perl should have been, and Perl is ONLY popular because it was first on the scene.
And a software engineer's skills probably won't be appreciated on small, short life-span projects. But engineers are definitely better for big projects than most people with no formal education who tought themselves.
But if you think complexity is a good thing in code... well... Perl is your language. And you'll pay for it in the long run.
Hm... perhaps I should give up on making money in IT and staying in shape, and instead learn to draw. And I had never heard of this "dollz" thing before now. It's a bunch of technically with-it girls? If I could possibly imagine myself being interested in the cartoon version of precious moments, I would look in to it further. But alas, no dice.
You could have said, "I think the continuing popularity and evolution of Windows shows that..." but you would still be wrong.
The philosophies behind the perl language are WRONG WRONG WRONG. Sometimes crap becomes popular. But any software engineering professor, the world over, would give a student an "F" if he suggested a language like perl. You may be a good programmer, but you aren't a good software engineer if you appreciate perl.
Wall must be a real Jeckyl-and-Hyde type guy if he can write the most elegant of C to implement the most complex and ill-conceived of the higher-level programming languages.
He deserves both respect and fear. I might ask him how to write good C, but I would not ask him how to design a new programming language.
The design decisions that went in to the Perl language go against practically everything any college student would learn in software engineering class.
It may be true that the C underneath it all is good, but the philosophies that went in to the perl language itself are just... demented. Wall's primary design philosphy seems to have been "use the fewest number of characters to express the most complex algorithm possible." That is the absolute opposite of what are universally accepted as good software engineering principles. "Learning" from that would make a student dumber.
You seem to have thoroughly out-geeked your boyfriend. I hope he has some other quality to make up for it!
And perhaps I will just have to look at the logs to see if there are enough IE6 people still around to make it worth supporting them. My site seems to attract mostly technically-able people, so lets hope not.
I recently started using CSS for the first time. I went right from the spec. The HTML and CSS validated strict. It looked great in Firefox. Then I tested it with IE6, and started to cry. I spent more hours trying to hack my way around the bugs in IE6's rendering than I spent making the page design in the first place.
With this news, though, I can go back to writing real CSS! This will save me so much time! The only people who won't be able to see my page properly are people who don't maintain their machines AT ALL. And they can piss off, for all I care. Running an unpatched Windows machine is peeing in the public pool of the internet.
Slashdot Mirror
Or they might just buy the Rights to Copy the works.
That, I imagine, is why the US government allows the Amish to exist.
This thread is going to be more a discussion of usernames than of net neutrality.
Why do
you write your posts with
unnatural and randomly placed linebreaks?
Is
it poetry?
It's already been done. But you don't even have to cloak gravitons. What do you think all that dark matter is? It's intersolar sprawl, and the aliens use the cloaking so that we don't keep bothering them, asking for technology.
Does the phone company have the liability exposure for any child a predator calls on the phone? Does the US postal service have the liability exposure for any letter a predator sends to a child?
Think of all the implications of this technology in the IT world!
"Please paint a happy little cloud to log on."
It takes an evil, demented person to post a url like "www.wijvertrouwenstemcomputersniet.nl" without making it a hyperlink.
As a software engineer with a particular passion for physics, I can understand your sentiments. But, at least for psychology, it is my understanding that respectable institutes are now (in the past decade or two) demanding proper statistical treatement of their research.
I work in IT. I don't work long hours. If you do, you should find another job, then quit your current job and TELL YOUR BOSS IT WAS BECAUSE HE OVERWORKED YOU. If everyone did likewise, companies with bad management (like yours) would be punished until they shape up.
If this is the way this guy plans to gather his statistics, he will be laughed out of school. This wouldn't even cut it for undergrad!
If his thesis is "people in career X are statistically more likely to experience divorce than the cross-vocational average," then he needs to start gathering public records on divorce and start doing the math.
It sounds like the submitter is looking for hugs, not data.
Your point makes it clear that computer translation can't be solved with a few good algorithms. However, I still think it can be solved with good algorithms and a HUGE DATABASE of phrases. Such a thing would likely need to be trained extensively, and require a fantastic amount of storage, but it seems very possible.
I imagine scene where government contractors take their computer home, sit down, and watch TV with it, correcting it when it picks the wrong meaning for ambiguous phrases.
You are correct. Every operating system since the dawn of time has had the goal of making maximum use of hardware. Windows is the only OS designed to do the opposite: make your hardware less useful than it could be.
"SPAM" is junk meat. "Spam" or "spam" is junk email.
Since when did the FDA have anything to do with materials science? I thought they were about drugs and food.
It is my understanding that, in the US, the person sueing you has to prove you lied to have any chance at winning a libel/slander case.
You can say anything you want about anyone, as long as it is true. You don't have to prove shit, the people doing the sueing are responsible for all the proof.
Modern software is complex enough that simply having the source code for a component does not necessarily mean a person (even a skilled coder) can maintain that component.
Such ideas made more sense 15 years ago, but not today.
People who got in to CS through math like the lispy stuff. Yeah, that's not practical.
But I just want to be one of the millions who say Ruby and Python are what Perl should have been, and Perl is ONLY popular because it was first on the scene.
And a software engineer's skills probably won't be appreciated on small, short life-span projects. But engineers are definitely better for big projects than most people with no formal education who tought themselves.
But if you think complexity is a good thing in code... well... Perl is your language. And you'll pay for it in the long run.
Hm... perhaps I should give up on making money in IT and staying in shape, and instead learn to draw. And I had never heard of this "dollz" thing before now. It's a bunch of technically with-it girls? If I could possibly imagine myself being interested in the cartoon version of precious moments, I would look in to it further. But alas, no dice.
You could have said, "I think the continuing popularity and evolution of Windows shows that..." but you would still be wrong.
The philosophies behind the perl language are WRONG WRONG WRONG. Sometimes crap becomes popular. But any software engineering professor, the world over, would give a student an "F" if he suggested a language like perl. You may be a good programmer, but you aren't a good software engineer if you appreciate perl.
Wall must be a real Jeckyl-and-Hyde type guy if he can write the most elegant of C to implement the most complex and ill-conceived of the higher-level programming languages.
He deserves both respect and fear. I might ask him how to write good C, but I would not ask him how to design a new programming language.
The design decisions that went in to the Perl language go against practically everything any college student would learn in software engineering class.
... demented. Wall's primary design philosphy seems to have been "use the fewest number of characters to express the most complex algorithm possible." That is the absolute opposite of what are universally accepted as good software engineering principles. "Learning" from that would make a student dumber.
It may be true that the C underneath it all is good, but the philosophies that went in to the perl language itself are just
You seem to have thoroughly out-geeked your boyfriend. I hope he has some other quality to make up for it!
And perhaps I will just have to look at the logs to see if there are enough IE6 people still around to make it worth supporting them. My site seems to attract mostly technically-able people, so lets hope not.
Well, I plan on just ignoring IE6, and rewriting everyting to the section of the spec that works on IE7 and Firefox.
BTW: Girl+Linux+slashdot=hot. Will you marry me?
I recently started using CSS for the first time. I went right from the spec. The HTML and CSS validated strict. It looked great in Firefox. Then I tested it with IE6, and started to cry. I spent more hours trying to hack my way around the bugs in IE6's rendering than I spent making the page design in the first place.
With this news, though, I can go back to writing real CSS! This will save me so much time! The only people who won't be able to see my page properly are people who don't maintain their machines AT ALL. And they can piss off, for all I care. Running an unpatched Windows machine is peeing in the public pool of the internet.