Where do you get this from? Java is shoddy implementation of its own chosen paradigm. I'm sure OO purists would more often recommend Eiffel to Java if you are speaking purely from a elegance perspective.
As elegant as it may seem to create a modular architecture for creating content, the web is page-driven and this is the best way to produce dynamic content. Html-in-code is dead. Long-winded OO syntax for producing html is dead. None of the Java solutions for producing content are going to last beyond the hype phase. The popularity of PHP is simple - it works, and it is only as complex as the problem it is trying to solve.
Huh? I think this is a troll, but wht the hell...
on
The New Flatland
·
· Score: 2
For inside the balloon is another ballon
Why? You state this without proof. Well, then my counter claim is that the universe isn't even a sphere, its a tube, and there is only one of them. Now we have two unprovable claims that lead to different conclusions.
This shows why the universe must be Open
The open-ness or closed-ness of the universe has nothing to do with geometric theory.
This is a worthy long term destiny for us to aim for, and I urge that we start preparing now.
You're right in a sense, SSTO isn't hard, but given current technology, impossible.
None of the craft you describe on their own is suitable for hauling loads into orbit.
People have been researching useable SSTO for twenty years. Many of them have concluded that it will not happen, ever. Do the math, you just can't get there using the materials we know how to use now.
As a community and as a species. It currently costs $10,000 USD / pound to send stuff into space.
But your presumption is that the solution must be a manned vehicle. You are not going to see SSTO in a manned vehicle unless there is a substantial breakthrough in materials research. A prominent scientist from the skunk works has gone as far to say SSTO will never happen.
Wrong. The f-18 is in production now with advanced avionics. Its a cost effective platform.
The Russian Mig-33 is capable of outflying anything we have in the sky
Come on, no one in the strategic community looks at the technical qualities of one platform over another as being significant anymore. How many Mig33's are there? How is the supply chain for spare parts? What logistical support is there for this and other Russian products?
Its nice to see that the military is bringing back from the dead a costly program that has already been demonstrated as a dead-end....and guess who is going to pay for it? You kiddo.
What is the military need for this? We've had two generations of bombers, the B1 and B2, that haven't seen combat and aren't going to, ever. We've spent billions on erecting advanced satellite networks for recon, and we've already got workhorses for hauling equipment and people.
There's only one explanation for this - mmmmmm pork. This has less to do with the military and more to do with military contractors generating new work for themselves.
Like the B2, this is a project without a goal, just some worthless tech designed to redirect money from the taxpayer's pocket into the contractor's pocket.
It runs on damn near
every hardware platform ever. There's no other OS that does that.
Because when it boils right down to it, there is no reason to have one OS on every platform. Added to which, we are not talking about an identical piece of software running on an IPAQ and a 390. The tweaks are signficant enough from a developer standpoint to almost consider them separate products.
While BSD was the first "free" OS, for some reason it didn't seem
to encourage the level of cooperation that Linux does.
The FreeBSD core committers model has worked very well, and by the looks of it, linux is heading in the very same direction.
You can slice and dice and rationalize it anyway you want, but you cannot go forward on the desktop with two user environments.
Its not as if either KDE or GNOME has really pushed the envelope in terms of architecture, useability, or look and feel. There's really no compelling technical reason at all why these projects must go forward independently.
As it stands, the important players have lined up behind GNOME, so its probably a moot point anyway, nonetheless, the linux community is wasting valuable time and resources providing interoperability between two products that are more or less slight variations on the same theme.
Someone decides to give away their intellectual material to the entire world, to no real benefit to themselves, and what do you hear from the/. peanut gallery? A bunch of posts pissing all over the idea, all trying to look insightful doing it.
Don't tell that to the thousands of tech workers in the United States paying toplevel bracket income taxes without any effective representation.
If the United States continues to increase imported talent, you could end up with a significant chunk of the top 5% of the wage earners being poltiically disenfranchised.
Content distributors no longer need to clog the NAP to get you want you want, many are using caching to deposit the information near or at your ISP. Sure for dynamic sites this can't be done completely, but you can sure as hell cache almost all of the images, and more of the content than you might think. How much of the bits on this page are really dynamic? I bet the images represent a larger chunk of bits.
BZZZZT! Go back to Economics 110 and try again.
on
New Fiber Development
·
· Score: 2
Pricing is vicious right now. None of the vendors are going to free up extra supply in a tight economy, it would drive the price down even lower and they would collapse. Add on the peering agreements which control the competition, and Yes Virginia, the internet backbone is a cartel operation.
There is more fiber put down at the backbone level than anyone needs or is willing to use at this point. Why? Light the fiber, create more supply, LOWER THE PRICE. That, along with increasingly strategic peering agreements, are measures in place to keep the price of transmitting a bit from falling to zero, which they certainly would if the fiber was lit up at once. While zero is a nice sounding number to the consumer, it stinks if you are Qwest or UUNet.
Of course reps will ignore such vast quantities if the origin cannot be verified - who wouldn't?
You can't have it both ways kids, the/. crowd equates anonymity to privacy, but total anonymity makes it pretty difficult to ascertain anything about an email automatically, so by default it should be discounted as spam.
For nearly two years major linux firms said they would one day charge for services related to their software, and for nearly as long/. users have been touting this as a viable business model. Now that it is implementation time, all of a sudden the cost of one movie ticket and a soda is too much to pay to a company that lets you download their principal product for free.
PSH - because perl is a "real" language
on
To Z Or Not To Z
·
· Score: 2
I prefer to use psh, which allows me to do far more than any of the existing shell languages, as it leverages he entire perl programming language.
There is absolutely no reason why perl or python or ruby or some real programming language shouldn't also be the langauge you use interactively.
Newsflash - all of the principal investors in Yahoo made out like bandits. The returns for initial investors were way over 1000%.
Your institution would have had at least two good years of yahoo stock sales to fill its coffers beyond your dreams...yes sir, you and your institution FUCKED UP MASSIVELY by passing on yahoo.
As someone who spent two years as a teaching assistant in a well known university, that students are in university to get high marks, not to get an education.
I once held an informal poll among the undergrads and concluded that almost all of them chose courses they could get high marks in, and almost all of them would opt to get a high mark than to focus on learning.
As for cheating - what do you expect? The whole educational experience is driven by marks, so cheating is a natural by-product. Some schools try to get around this by focusing on examinations instead of assignments for the bulk of the course marks, but it has been demonstrated again and again that exams only teach one thing - how to do well on exams.
The only way to get technical education back on track is to make co-operative/work terms mandatory, even for students who wish to pursue theoretical avenues.
The PPC market seems to have splintered between AIX and the Mac, both declining markets...how long can IBM continue to develop and market an independent architecture when most users and developers have concluded that Intel processors are "fast enough"?
Given the current trend of consolidation, I see room Intel, AMD, and a high-end player yet to be named - either Alpha or PPC. I'm discounting the Mac userbase in advance as I believe Mac users care the least about the technical details of their platform, and hence constitute an OS market more than a microprocessor market.
Outside of better satellites and jetliners, people are losing interest in what goes on above us, and frankly who can blame them? Almost all of the progress made in increasing the prosperity and comfort level of the average citizen has been gained through information technology and consumer eletronics.
Given the choice between landing on Mars and a fiber connection to their house, most Americans would choose the bandwith. Of course science isn't an either-or proposition, but my general point is that taxpayers don't see a payoff from space research.
The rich get a larger proportional piece of the cut because they pay a much larger proportion of the federal tax bill.
The top 1% in this country pay 23% of
the federal tax bill. The top 10% pays 45%. The top 20% pays nearly 75%. The top 30% pay 90%. The
top 40% pay 94%... and the top 50% pay nearly 97%.
That's right... the bottom 50% pay less than 4% of the total tax bill.
Given these stats, it is completely fair that the rich get their fair proportionate cut of any tax break.
Slashdot Mirror
Where do you get this from? Java is shoddy implementation of its own chosen paradigm. I'm sure OO purists would more often recommend Eiffel to Java if you are speaking purely from a elegance perspective.
As elegant as it may seem to create a modular architecture for creating content, the web is page-driven and this is the best way to produce dynamic content. Html-in-code is dead. Long-winded OO syntax for producing html is dead. None of the Java solutions for producing content are going to last beyond the hype phase. The popularity of PHP is simple - it works, and it is only as complex as the problem it is trying to solve.
Why? You state this without proof. Well, then my counter claim is that the universe isn't even a sphere, its a tube, and there is only one of them. Now we have two unprovable claims that lead to different conclusions.
This shows why the universe must be Open
The open-ness or closed-ness of the universe has nothing to do with geometric theory.
This is a worthy long term destiny for us to aim for, and I urge that we start preparing now.
Okay, this is a troll, you got me.
You're right in a sense, SSTO isn't hard, but given current technology, impossible.
None of the craft you describe on their own is suitable for hauling loads into orbit.
People have been researching useable SSTO for twenty years. Many of them have concluded that it will not happen, ever. Do the math, you just can't get there using the materials we know how to use now.
But your presumption is that the solution must be a manned vehicle. You are not going to see SSTO in a manned vehicle unless there is a substantial breakthrough in materials research. A prominent scientist from the skunk works has gone as far to say SSTO will never happen.
Wrong. The f-18 is in production now with advanced avionics. Its a cost effective platform.
The Russian Mig-33 is capable of outflying anything we have in the sky
Come on, no one in the strategic community looks at the technical qualities of one platform over another as being significant anymore. How many Mig33's are there? How is the supply chain for spare parts? What logistical support is there for this and other Russian products?
What is the military need for this? We've had two generations of bombers, the B1 and B2, that haven't seen combat and aren't going to, ever. We've spent billions on erecting advanced satellite networks for recon, and we've already got workhorses for hauling equipment and people.
There's only one explanation for this - mmmmmm pork. This has less to do with the military and more to do with military contractors generating new work for themselves.
Like the B2, this is a project without a goal, just some worthless tech designed to redirect money from the taxpayer's pocket into the contractor's pocket.
the web logs of one of the top three busiest sites in the world shows that people do in fact use late-model browsers.
Because when it boils right down to it, there is no reason to have one OS on every platform. Added to which, we are not talking about an identical piece of software running on an IPAQ and a 390. The tweaks are signficant enough from a developer standpoint to almost consider them separate products.
While BSD was the first "free" OS, for some reason it didn't seem to encourage the level of cooperation that Linux does.
The FreeBSD core committers model has worked very well, and by the looks of it, linux is heading in the very same direction.
Its not as if either KDE or GNOME has really pushed the envelope in terms of architecture, useability, or look and feel. There's really no compelling technical reason at all why these projects must go forward independently.
As it stands, the important players have lined up behind GNOME, so its probably a moot point anyway, nonetheless, the linux community is wasting valuable time and resources providing interoperability between two products that are more or less slight variations on the same theme.
Someone decides to give away their intellectual material to the entire world, to no real benefit to themselves, and what do you hear from the /. peanut gallery? A bunch of posts pissing all over the idea, all trying to look insightful doing it.
Huh? Java has a totally retarded language design that at best is an imperfect improvement over an even larger kluge, C++.
Of course, some of the "improvements" to Java aren't improvements at all. Everything is a class? No templates?
There is a reason all the implementations of Java are crappy - you can't make a cake out of shit.
If the United States continues to increase imported talent, you could end up with a significant chunk of the top 5% of the wage earners being poltiically disenfranchised.
So you tell me where the "citizens" are.
Content distributors no longer need to clog the NAP to get you want you want, many are using caching to deposit the information near or at your ISP. Sure for dynamic sites this can't be done completely, but you can sure as hell cache almost all of the images, and more of the content than you might think. How much of the bits on this page are really dynamic? I bet the images represent a larger chunk of bits.
Pricing is vicious right now. None of the vendors are going to free up extra supply in a tight economy, it would drive the price down even lower and they would collapse. Add on the peering agreements which control the competition, and Yes Virginia, the internet backbone is a cartel operation.
There is more fiber put down at the backbone level than anyone needs or is willing to use at this point. Why? Light the fiber, create more supply, LOWER THE PRICE. That, along with increasingly strategic peering agreements, are measures in place to keep the price of transmitting a bit from falling to zero, which they certainly would if the fiber was lit up at once. While zero is a nice sounding number to the consumer, it stinks if you are Qwest or UUNet.
What narcissistic hooey. You're a footnote in the history of software folks, be happy with that.
You can't have it both ways kids, the /. crowd equates anonymity to privacy, but total anonymity makes it pretty difficult to ascertain anything about an email automatically, so by default it should be discounted as spam.
There is absolutely no reason why perl or python or ruby or some real programming language shouldn't also be the langauge you use interactively.
Your institution would have had at least two good years of yahoo stock sales to fill its coffers beyond your dreams...yes sir, you and your institution FUCKED UP MASSIVELY by passing on yahoo.
I once held an informal poll among the undergrads and concluded that almost all of them chose courses they could get high marks in, and almost all of them would opt to get a high mark than to focus on learning.
As for cheating - what do you expect? The whole educational experience is driven by marks, so cheating is a natural by-product. Some schools try to get around this by focusing on examinations instead of assignments for the bulk of the course marks, but it has been demonstrated again and again that exams only teach one thing - how to do well on exams.
The only way to get technical education back on track is to make co-operative/work terms mandatory, even for students who wish to pursue theoretical avenues.
Given the current trend of consolidation, I see room Intel, AMD, and a high-end player yet to be named - either Alpha or PPC. I'm discounting the Mac userbase in advance as I believe Mac users care the least about the technical details of their platform, and hence constitute an OS market more than a microprocessor market.
Given the choice between landing on Mars and a fiber connection to their house, most Americans would choose the bandwith. Of course science isn't an either-or proposition, but my general point is that taxpayers don't see a payoff from space research.
The rich get a larger proportional piece of the cut because they pay a much larger proportion of the federal tax bill.
The top 1% in this country pay 23% of the federal tax bill. The top 10% pays 45%. The top 20% pays nearly 75%. The top 30% pay 90%. The top 40% pay 94%... and the top 50% pay nearly 97%.
That's right... the bottom 50% pay less than 4% of the total tax bill.
Given these stats, it is completely fair that the rich get their fair proportionate cut of any tax break.