Don't you realize that RedHat is a multi-million company that knows exactly what it needs on its servers? That maybe, just maybe, RedHat needs systemd, and is funding it because of that?
For example with the file, the application could ask for an alternative file location. Or if the socket can't disconnect, the app can ask the user to connect to the internet again.
A file should be flush()ed so that changed are written out. That can cause I/O errors. If you disconnect your computer from the Internet, that can cause an I/O error on close(). There are sure more valid scenarious, when close() or flush() can cause I/O errors. There are also more subtle ways, like if you write a log message to a file in your dtor. That log message can cause I/O error.
And how do you handle exceptions? For example, if you close a file it's a good idea to flush() changes. flush() can throw I/O exceptions. Or if you close a socket. Or anything else that handles external resources.
You know that you can do that with the PhantomReference, SoftReference, WeakReference classes? http://docs.oracle.com/javase/... clear() Clears this reference object.
With the limitation that C++ destructors cannot throw exceptions, why would you need them in Java? a close() method is just fine in Java, because you don't need to deallocate any memory. So what would you do in Java with destructors?
You should not free up resources in a c++ destructor. I guess that is exactly what Linus meant with his quote. http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?BewareO... http://www.codingstandard.com/... C++ destructors can be used to deallocate any memory, or do other stuff that cannot go wrong. But they cannot be used to release any resources, like sockets, streams, files, connections, etc.
Why are people taking C.S. Lewis so seriosly? I was reading quotes and texts from Lewis and it's full of holes and jumping to conclusions that only show his presupposed world view. I view C.S. Lewis as just another Christian apologetic, more like Willeam Lane Craig.
In religion, the ultimate cause of things is always god or gods. The conclusion is already set in stone, and theists are trying to find ways to validate the conclusion. "by definition, science cannot tell you about them", yes it can, and does. The ultimate cause of things are interactions of matter with the four forces of nature, gravitation, electromagnetism, weak and strong force. I'm sorry if that answer is not satisfying to some, because it does not make you a special created purposeful snowflake. Or, in the words of Fight Club, "You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake. You are the same decaying organic matter as everyone else, and we are all a part of the same compost pile.—Tyler Durden"
What is the cause of matter and those four forces of nature? We don't know yet, but that does not mean we will never know. But we have the best method to discover it, and that best method is so far the scientific method. The scientific method is observation, testing and creating of models with explanatory and predictive powers.
"philistines like Richard Dawkins and Jerry Coyne thinking science has made God irrelevant" - way to go with ad-hominim attacks. God is an idea to explain natural penomena, because God is postulated by religion as the ultimate cause of things. Science explains things better and more accurate, and hence it does make God obsolete.
"You might think of science advocate, cultural illiterate, mendacious anti-Catholic propagandist, and possible serial fabulist Neil DeGrasse Tyson" - more with the ad-hominim attacks. "Actually, he doesn't just dismiss it. He goes much further — to argue that undergraduates should actively avoid studying philosophy at all. Because, apparently, asking too many questions "can really mess you up.""
That makes Tyson a pragmatist and not a philistine. And I agree with Tyson. Philosophie is ultimatelly useless, and it's just a waste of time. In science the ultimate arbiter of what is true and what is false is nature, and not philosophical arguments.
The only trouble I had was with Debian Sid, because of the rolling-release updates. The updates were broken some of the time. But the system was still running fine, it just meant that I had to wait a few weeks so that the updates were fixed. Compare that with Windows updates, and the news that update X broke the system.
I used Linux now for over 6 years. Ubuntu, Debian, Suse. On at least 6 different laptops. Just install it, finish, and it works. Sure, sometimes you have problems with drivers because the hardware vendor does not support Linux. But that have nothing to do with Linux itself.
I don't think you "get Linux". Linux you just install once and then it runs and runs, regardless of any updates. Case in example, I installed Fedora 19 for my mother. After a few months I make an update, that was over 300 packages. Download in the background, updates in 20 minutes, restart, finish. No problems. New Fedora 20 comes out, I just make a distribution update. That was over 1000 packages. Download in the background, updates in 40 to 60 minutes, restart, finish. No problems. And Fedora 20 is a so called "bleeding-edge" distribution. If you use Ubuntu LTS or Debian Stable you have even less of a hastle.
I used Linux now for over 6 years. Ubuntu, Debian, Suse, Fedora. And I never "tinker around and do all kinds of clever things with it to hone it to be the ultimate OS for me". Just install it, finish, and it works.
What I want for Windows: - the possibility to delete files even if they are in use - Unix tools available (find, grep, ssh, rsync, gpg, git) out of the box - support for Linux file systems (ext2, ext3, ext4, brtfs) - support for Lvm and dm-raid and cryp LUKS - sshfs to mount file systems over ssh - get rid of device letters - CUPS - virtual desktops - software updates that do not take 2 hours and require x restarts - repository for hardware drivers, so I don't have to hunt down drivers from vendors - a terminal emulator that does not was ported from 1991 DOS - dialogs that can be resized, all the time - boot manager that supports alternative systems (GRUP can start Windows and Linux, and have auto-setup) - possibility to re-assign keyboard keys without registry hacks - get rid of the registry - possibility to just copy Windows to a different computer - recognition of my second hard disk in Windows Install (seriously, I cannot install Windows 7 to my second hard disk) - get rid of the System-Partition
That is no reason to misrepresent the cited paper. The correct presentation should be "Paper found three alleles and four genes that are linked to cognetive abilities". The rest about the IQ and which factors contribute to intelligence is not the subject of the study in the paper.
We identify several common genetic variants associated with cognitive performance using a two-stage approach: we conduct a genome-wide association study of educational attainment to generate a set of candidates, and then we estimate the association of these variants with cognitive performance. In older Americans, we find that these variants are jointly associated with cognitive health. Bioinformatics analyses implicate a set of genes that is associated with a particular neurotransmitter pathway involved in synaptic plasticity, the main cellular mechanism for learning and memory. In addition to the substantive contribution, this work also serves to show a proxy-phenotype approach to discovering common genetic variants that is likely to be useful for many phenotypes of interest to social scientists (such as personality traits).
How the hell does the article now writes that "The scientists first looked for differences in the genome that correlated with academic achievement"? No, they looked for "educational attainment". Then the abstract goes on "Three SNPs (rs1487441, rs7923609, and rs2721173) are significantly associated with cognitive performance after correction for multiple hypothesis testing." SNPs are different alleles of the same gene.
Then, "Convergent evidence from a set of bioinformatics analyses implicates four specific genes (KNCMA1, NRXN1, POU2F3, and SCRT). All of these genes are associated with a particular neurotransmitter pathway involved in synaptic plasticity, the main cellular mechanism for learning and memory." But the article states that " On top of that, the three gene locations that did seem to have a stronger correlation weren't involved in development of the nervous system."
Oh please cry me a river. Impose systemd on others? Did Lennart own Ubuntu, Debian, RedHat and Suse now? It was deceided by the developers of those distributions to replace the old sysv init with systemd, and the alternatives were concidered. In Debian it was a democratic process by voting. RedHat is a company so clearly they will not bet on a broken system. Almost all of the arguments against systemd are not valid on technical grounds, and now you want to muddy the waters by attacking Lennart directly.
Systemd sypports text files just fine, you do the straw man here. Fedora have systemd since F18 (I think), today I'm using F20, and I still have all my log text files in the same location. Debian *voted* on the issue and decided that the alternatives (upstart, etc.) are not good enough technically compared to systemd, and sysv init was obolete. If you are thinking that Debian is now owned by Lennart, you really need to get your tin hat.
Systemd is not a mess. Many of the points are just false. Like your straw man with binary log files.
The game designer have no right to take away my rights, and adding DRM is taking away my right of re-sale, fair-use and entering into public domain. Copyright is a compromise, we allow you to have a monopole on your software for a certain period of time so you can reclaim money lost on creating the software, inciting you to create software. But always under the premise that we have certain rights on the bought product. If you remove unilaterally my rights, why should I give you any rights back?
[...]Stimulation of the claustral electrode reproducibly resulted in a complete arrest of volitional behavior, unresponsiveness, and amnesia without negative motor symptoms or mere aphasia. The disruption of consciousness did not outlast the stimulation and occurred without any epileptiform discharges.[...]
You proved my point, "Spirituality is the process of adding "Truth" (aka just ideas or claims), without any predictive power or support from observations".
Spirituality is based upon gnosticism. That is, knowledge by direct experience.
Knowledge is justified true believes. They are justified if you can support them with evidence, and they are true if they correspond to reality. There are different kind of evidence, it can be personal experience, logical arguments, empirical experiments, etc. Personal experiences is the lowest form of evidence, because it is by nature subjective.
There are no proofs for experiences i.e. Prove that you love your spouse.
Bad example, I can actually prove that I love my spouse by the neurons fire in my brain and the endorphins (hormones) in my blood. But you are correct, that there are no objective methods to prove personal experiences, that is why personal experiences is the weakest form of evidence. Many people have personal experiences to be abducted by aliens, or personal experiences with Big Foot, or saw Elvis after his death, or "born again" Christians, and so on.
I would recommend starting with the beginning of ALL Wisdom: Know Thyself.
I agree. And the scientific method gave us this knowledge, more detailed and more supported by evidence then any method before. And the answer is: we are physical beings in a physical universe.
Church Father Clement of Alexandria said it best: "... the greatest of all lessons to know one's self. For if one knows himself, he will know God; and knowing God, he will be made like God... and that man becomes God, since God so wills... "
Nonsensical nonsense.
You are a spiritual being in a physical body having a human experience. You are significantly much, much more then your body. The real interesting question is "How much more?" Some use meditation, others lucid dreaming, some music, others religion, etc. Use whatever works. Condemning another man's path simply because it doesn't work for you is the height ignorance, arrogance, and stupidity. Theism is only 1 of the 4 paths.
And every path led to nothing at all. Sure, people can induce hallucinations and dreams through very different methods, drugs (Native American), oxygen deprivation, dancing, and so on, but this all just proves the point that we are physical beings in a physical universe. You can chemically alter your brain and get neurons fire and get visions or dreams. So what? Nobody got a Nobel Price with that method, or got anything else from it.
You are a spiritual being in a physical body having a human experience.
Please prove that first. Otherwise it's just a religion.
That is why both religion and spirituality are BS. Please demonstrate first that there is a god.
* Science is the process of removing falsehood and adding predictive models of nature, based on direct and indirect observations. * Spirituality is the process of adding "Truth" (aka just ideas or claims), without any predictive power or support from observations * Religion is one ritualistic process claiming to be the only way to "Truth" (aka just ideas or claims), without any predictive power or support from observations
Slashdot Mirror
Don't you realize that RedHat is a multi-million company that knows exactly what it needs on its servers?
That maybe, just maybe, RedHat needs systemd, and is funding it because of that?
Maybe because systemd is fucking good? And all the whiners about it are just retards. Seriosly, I did not came acros one legit critique of systemd.
For example with the file, the application could ask for an alternative file location.
Or if the socket can't disconnect, the app can ask the user to connect to the internet again.
A file should be flush()ed so that changed are written out. That can cause I/O errors. If you disconnect your computer from the Internet, that can cause an I/O error on close(). There are sure more valid scenarious, when close() or flush() can cause I/O errors. There are also more subtle ways, like if you write a log message to a file in your dtor. That log message can cause I/O error.
And how do you handle exceptions? For example, if you close a file it's a good idea to flush() changes. flush() can throw I/O exceptions.
Or if you close a socket. Or anything else that handles external resources.
You know that you can do that with the PhantomReference, SoftReference, WeakReference classes?
http://docs.oracle.com/javase/...
clear() Clears this reference object.
With the limitation that C++ destructors cannot throw exceptions, why would you need them in Java? a close() method is just fine in Java, because you don't need to deallocate any memory. So what would you do in Java with destructors?
You should not free up resources in a c++ destructor. I guess that is exactly what Linus meant with his quote.
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?BewareO...
http://www.codingstandard.com/...
C++ destructors can be used to deallocate any memory, or do other stuff that cannot go wrong. But they cannot be used to release any resources, like sockets, streams, files, connections, etc.
Why are people taking C.S. Lewis so seriosly? I was reading quotes and texts from Lewis and it's full of holes and jumping to conclusions that only show his presupposed world view. I view C.S. Lewis as just another Christian apologetic, more like Willeam Lane Craig.
In religion, the ultimate cause of things is always god or gods. The conclusion is already set in stone, and theists are trying to find ways to validate the conclusion.
"by definition, science cannot tell you about them", yes it can, and does. The ultimate cause of things are interactions of matter with the four forces of nature, gravitation, electromagnetism, weak and strong force. I'm sorry if that answer is not satisfying to some, because it does not make you a special created purposeful snowflake. Or, in the words of Fight Club, "You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake. You are the same decaying organic matter as everyone else, and we are all a part of the same compost pile.—Tyler Durden"
What is the cause of matter and those four forces of nature? We don't know yet, but that does not mean we will never know. But we have the best method to discover it, and that best method is so far the scientific method. The scientific method is observation, testing and creating of models with explanatory and predictive powers.
"philistines like Richard Dawkins and Jerry Coyne thinking science has made God irrelevant" - way to go with ad-hominim attacks.
God is an idea to explain natural penomena, because God is postulated by religion as the ultimate cause of things. Science explains things better and more accurate, and hence it does make God obsolete.
"You might think of science advocate, cultural illiterate, mendacious anti-Catholic propagandist, and possible serial fabulist Neil DeGrasse Tyson" - more with the ad-hominim attacks.
"Actually, he doesn't just dismiss it. He goes much further — to argue that undergraduates should actively avoid studying philosophy at all. Because, apparently, asking too many questions "can really mess you up.""
That makes Tyson a pragmatist and not a philistine. And I agree with Tyson. Philosophie is ultimatelly useless, and it's just a waste of time. In science the ultimate arbiter of what is true and what is false is nature, and not philosophical arguments.
The only trouble I had was with Debian Sid, because of the rolling-release updates. The updates were broken some of the time. But the system was still running fine, it just meant that I had to wait a few weeks so that the updates were fixed.
Compare that with Windows updates, and the news that update X broke the system.
http://www.howtogeek.com/17962...
http://threatpost.com/microsof...
http://www.sevenforums.com/win...
I used Linux now for over 6 years. Ubuntu, Debian, Suse. On at least 6 different laptops. Just install it, finish, and it works.
Sure, sometimes you have problems with drivers because the hardware vendor does not support Linux. But that have nothing to do with Linux itself.
I don't think you "get Linux". Linux you just install once and then it runs and runs, regardless of any updates. Case in example, I installed Fedora 19 for my mother. After a few months I make an update, that was over 300 packages. Download in the background, updates in 20 minutes, restart, finish. No problems. New Fedora 20 comes out, I just make a distribution update. That was over 1000 packages. Download in the background, updates in 40 to 60 minutes, restart, finish. No problems. And Fedora 20 is a so called "bleeding-edge" distribution. If you use Ubuntu LTS or Debian Stable you have even less of a hastle.
I used Linux now for over 6 years. Ubuntu, Debian, Suse, Fedora. And I never "tinker around and do all kinds of clever things with it to hone it to be the ultimate OS for me". Just install it, finish, and it works.
What I want for Windows:
- the possibility to delete files even if they are in use
- Unix tools available (find, grep, ssh, rsync, gpg, git) out of the box
- support for Linux file systems (ext2, ext3, ext4, brtfs)
- support for Lvm and dm-raid and cryp LUKS
- sshfs to mount file systems over ssh
- get rid of device letters
- CUPS
- virtual desktops
- software updates that do not take 2 hours and require x restarts
- repository for hardware drivers, so I don't have to hunt down drivers from vendors
- a terminal emulator that does not was ported from 1991 DOS
- dialogs that can be resized, all the time
- boot manager that supports alternative systems (GRUP can start Windows and Linux, and have auto-setup)
- possibility to re-assign keyboard keys without registry hacks
- get rid of the registry
- possibility to just copy Windows to a different computer
- recognition of my second hard disk in Windows Install (seriously, I cannot install Windows 7 to my second hard disk)
- get rid of the System-Partition
That is no reason to misrepresent the cited paper. The correct presentation should be "Paper found three alleles and four genes that are linked to cognetive abilities". The rest about the IQ and which factors contribute to intelligence is not the subject of the study in the paper.
From the original paper:
http://www.pnas.org/content/ea...
We identify several common genetic variants associated with cognitive performance using a two-stage approach: we conduct a genome-wide association study of educational attainment to generate a set of candidates, and then we estimate the association of these variants with cognitive performance. In older Americans, we find that these variants are jointly associated with cognitive health. Bioinformatics analyses implicate a set of genes that is associated with a particular neurotransmitter pathway involved in synaptic plasticity, the main cellular mechanism for learning and memory. In addition to the substantive contribution, this work also serves to show a proxy-phenotype approach to discovering common genetic variants that is likely to be useful for many phenotypes of interest to social scientists (such as personality traits).
How the hell does the article now writes that "The scientists first looked for differences in the genome that correlated with academic achievement"? No, they looked for "educational attainment". Then the abstract goes on "Three SNPs (rs1487441, rs7923609, and rs2721173) are significantly associated with cognitive performance after correction for multiple hypothesis testing." SNPs are different alleles of the same gene.
Then, "Convergent evidence from a set of bioinformatics analyses implicates four specific genes (KNCMA1, NRXN1, POU2F3, and SCRT). All of these genes are associated with a particular neurotransmitter pathway involved in synaptic plasticity, the main cellular mechanism for learning and memory." But the article states that " On top of that, the three gene locations that did seem to have a stronger correlation weren't involved in development of the nervous system."
What the hell??
Oh, Lennart own Gnome now?
That is exactly the type of comments I read from critiques of systemd.
Oh please cry me a river. Impose systemd on others? Did Lennart own Ubuntu, Debian, RedHat and Suse now? It was deceided by the developers of those distributions to replace the old sysv init with systemd, and the alternatives were concidered. In Debian it was a democratic process by voting. RedHat is a company so clearly they will not bet on a broken system. Almost all of the arguments against systemd are not valid on technical grounds, and now you want to muddy the waters by attacking Lennart directly.
Systemd sypports text files just fine, you do the straw man here. Fedora have systemd since F18 (I think), today I'm using F20, and I still have all my log text files in the same location. Debian *voted* on the issue and decided that the alternatives (upstart, etc.) are not good enough technically compared to systemd, and sysv init was obolete. If you are thinking that Debian is now owned by Lennart, you really need to get your tin hat.
Systemd is not a mess. Many of the points are just false. Like your straw man with binary log files.
NO!
The game designer have no right to take away my rights, and adding DRM is taking away my right of re-sale, fair-use and entering into public domain. Copyright is a compromise, we allow you to have a monopole on your software for a certain period of time so you can reclaim money lost on creating the software, inciting you to create software. But always under the premise that we have certain rights on the bought product. If you remove unilaterally my rights, why should I give you any rights back?
Great, and if you could provide the peer-reviewed articles of the studies then you would deserve the +5 Informative.
Why do you think the link is broken?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pu... works fine by me, here is the Abstract:
[...]Stimulation of the claustral electrode reproducibly resulted in a complete arrest of volitional behavior, unresponsiveness, and amnesia without negative motor symptoms or mere aphasia. The disruption of consciousness did not outlast the stimulation and occurred without any epileptiform discharges.[...]
- Superior Advertisement
- Superior punishing of unnecessary updates
- Superior tracking of users
- Superior copy protection
And those are the only points a company is interested in.
You proved my point, "Spirituality is the process of adding "Truth" (aka just ideas or claims), without any predictive power or support from observations".
Spirituality is based upon gnosticism. That is, knowledge by direct experience.
Knowledge is justified true believes. They are justified if you can support them with evidence, and they are true if they correspond to reality. There are different kind of evidence, it can be personal experience, logical arguments, empirical experiments, etc. Personal experiences is the lowest form of evidence, because it is by nature subjective.
There are no proofs for experiences i.e. Prove that you love your spouse.
Bad example, I can actually prove that I love my spouse by the neurons fire in my brain and the endorphins (hormones) in my blood. But you are correct, that there are no objective methods to prove personal experiences, that is why personal experiences is the weakest form of evidence. Many people have personal experiences to be abducted by aliens, or personal experiences with Big Foot, or saw Elvis after his death, or "born again" Christians, and so on.
I would recommend starting with the beginning of ALL Wisdom: Know Thyself.
I agree. And the scientific method gave us this knowledge, more detailed and more supported by evidence then any method before. And the answer is: we are physical beings in a physical universe.
Church Father Clement of Alexandria said it best: " ... the greatest of all lessons to know one's self. For if one knows himself, he will know God; and knowing God, he will be made like God ... and that man becomes God, since God so wills ... "
Nonsensical nonsense.
You are a spiritual being in a physical body having a human experience.
You are significantly much, much more then your body. The real interesting question is "How much more?"
Some use meditation, others lucid dreaming, some music, others religion, etc. Use whatever works.
Condemning another man's path simply because it doesn't work for you is the height ignorance, arrogance, and stupidity.
Theism is only 1 of the 4 paths.
And every path led to nothing at all. Sure, people can induce hallucinations and dreams through very different methods, drugs (Native American), oxygen deprivation, dancing, and so on, but this all just proves the point that we are physical beings in a physical universe. You can chemically alter your brain and get neurons fire and get visions or dreams. So what? Nobody got a Nobel Price with that method, or got anything else from it.
You are a spiritual being in a physical body having a human experience.
Please prove that first. Otherwise it's just a religion.
That is why both religion and spirituality are BS. Please demonstrate first that there is a god.
* Science is the process of removing falsehood and adding predictive models of nature, based on direct and indirect observations.
* Spirituality is the process of adding "Truth" (aka just ideas or claims), without any predictive power or support from observations
* Religion is one ritualistic process claiming to be the only way to "Truth" (aka just ideas or claims), without any predictive power or support from observations
Yes, I was reading about that. Does the Police have any jurisdiction outside of the old City of London? If not, Torrentz can sue them for damages.