I think leaving any sooner would have violated the terms of his sale of Nullsoft to AOL.
I don't know. But I think. And I was at Spinner when Spinner and Nullsoft were bought by AOL and merged. So I still don't know, but I'm not totally guessing either.
remember when everyone thought of Microsoft as being in Seattle? Once people realized they were in Redmond, it was all down hill from there, no offense to Redmond intended.
There is hardly ever one standard for an area. Standards are not defined by being solitary, they are defined by consistency. The standard is a consistent set of features. It allows interoperability. Standards cast too young will not become long term standards, but it was still a standard.
Don't use something b/c it's a standards, know it because it is one.
I can't stand this. For years and years I can't stand this. I don't care what Joseph Campbell said or if I spelled his name correctly.
Even if all stories can be -interpreted- and assigned one of 5 categories... that's about as fundamental as saying there are two kinds of matter in the univers and two kinds only, that which is part of the earth, and that which is beyond the earth. It's true, but not only pointless, it's misleading.
So it is with the "five" stories and "every story is from the Bible" schoole of anti-creativity.
>Professional philosophers? That's real bright. Beleive me, these people have nothing up on anyone else. The fact that they do this for a living should clue you into something. People who get paid to think of what life might mean... That's pretty rich.
philosophers have a lot to show for all their thinking, like math, physics, for example, logic, ethics. What life might mean is a question for teleologists... who are mostly religious. Probably more philosophers think that meaning is assigned than think it's inherent. Philosophers are found at the fringes of understanding, making the most abstract abstraction possible, the philosophy of mathematics, for example, tries to understand the underlying abstractions of mathematics and possibly how they work, why they work... do they really work?
the funny thing is quantum mechanics and general relativity are a 1000 times more bizarre than anything he described, although they are also supported by thousands of experiments.
your message is ironic. It's only by considering the relationship of phantasy and reality that youc an "wake up", especially considering the way in which the two are mixed and hard to distinguish. I would wager that you yourself have many make believe ideas held solid and real in your heart which are not real. It's the nature of the mind. The lack of meaning in the Matrix is (1) you don't have to think about these issues to watch the movie, which is entertaining for most because of it's 200% chopsaki action style. (2) the bullets aren't real... why is the second movie still looking to be about bullets (I didn't see it yet).
I'm familiar with epistomology and skepticism, what are you refering to? I thought that it raised some of the good old questions pretty well (considering how so much philophy likes to just avoid the question anyway, what with not agreeing on the answers after thousands of years of discussion.
btw, perhaps an interesting philosophic treatment would address the question, "how do they know the whole thing isn't still a part of the matrix... the blue pill might just run a program that makes you have this phantasy of leaving the matrix" (then they could try again on the entertaining near miss human-batteries idea)
as soon as you start embedding special codes in the text to tell the printer to change fonts, or accept bitmap data, etc. etc. you start on a road that takes you toward wanting something like postscript. You could say, why do that on the printer but I would say, (1) the printer knows more than you about itself, how it really wants to render fonts vs. bitmaps, it physical margins, etc. and will do better job rendering the document than, for example, if you render it on your computer and send a bitmap (2) you should distribute processing when you can.
The only real problem with Java is that so many kids are taking it today (I have heard it is being taught in more colleges than English), and those kids are being put in to positions they are not ready for (Bad economy, that wants cheaper labor). That coupled with the fact that it is a relatively new language screams for performance issues. This isn't the languages fault.
I think it is Java's fault. Like VB it's supposed to be the language so robust you can't hose it. Code away, think nothing of memory, automagic at your service! It promotes a totally false idea of what the pitfalls of programming really are. I could be wrong, but I don't think so.
well, regarding joking, I got the joke, and frankly, your little rant was merely an opportunity for my own, because we have both heard these things that set us off before.
As far as Java getting better. I'm open minded. The day it really performs better, I'm admitting it.
Turning to good programmers. The point is to compare like to like. Average programmer to average programmer. The Average programmer makes much faster code in C++, and can be instructed to use safe idioms to address some of the problems average programmers supposedly have with memory management issues. Good java programmers might make more repsonsive GUIs, good C++ programmers make particle simulations happen. That goodness gets more effect.
In fact, comparing good programmer to good programmers is my whole point with this efficiency question. A good programmer has no trouble mastering a compiled language, and is just as fast. I'm just feeling like I'm getting too much marketing hype in, where is the beef, as the old lady asked. Ok so there is a wide library of calls, documented in a central place. Well, there is a huge array of C++ libraries and tools too. And most of what Java offers is stuff Sun has provided VIA Java. Sun could have made a standard class system for C++ too... would we be better off? Probably.
I knew someone was going to say that. I put halve and it didn't look right. I went to dictionary.com and it was down. I then realized I didn't care too much and went with half. At least every single person will understand what I meant.
Slashdot Mirror
in America the kid asks... "what's a kilogram".
PS: "Calvin, a kilogram is a deadly singing telegram!"
personally I was fond of "competition-adverse" over "anti-competitive".
exactly, the code did not belong to the employees, but to the organization. Only the copyright holder can do that.
I think leaving any sooner would have violated the terms of his sale of Nullsoft to AOL.
I don't know. But I think. And I was at Spinner when Spinner and Nullsoft were bought by AOL and merged. So I still don't know, but I'm not totally guessing either.
selling to AOL had more of the "make 50 Million dollars" advantages.
... Stalker.
... after you attend, they have to kill you.
remember when everyone thought of Microsoft as being in Seattle? Once people realized they were in Redmond, it was all down hill from there, no offense to Redmond intended.
I think it's Darl McBride in a penguin suit with the gun to his own head --- "Give me your money or the penguin gets it!"
Insightful, no. There should be (+1 Entertaining Fantasy), though.
...."after the money's gone"
holy nell! I never realized it, but that song is about MMORPGs.
There is hardly ever one standard for an area. Standards are not defined by being solitary, they are defined by consistency. The standard is a consistent set of features. It allows interoperability. Standards cast too young will not become long term standards, but it was still a standard.
Don't use something b/c it's a standards, know it because it is one.
I can't stand this. For years and years I can't stand this. I don't care what Joseph Campbell said or if I spelled his name correctly.
Even if all stories can be -interpreted- and assigned one of 5 categories... that's about as fundamental as saying there are two kinds of matter in the univers and two kinds only, that which is part of the earth, and that which is beyond the earth. It's true, but not only pointless, it's misleading.
So it is with the "five" stories and "every story is from the Bible" schoole of anti-creativity.
>Professional philosophers? That's real bright. Beleive me, these people have nothing up on anyone else. The fact that they do this for a living should clue you into something. People who get paid to think of what life might mean... That's pretty rich.
philosophers have a lot to show for all their thinking, like math, physics, for example, logic, ethics. What life might mean is a question for teleologists... who are mostly religious. Probably more philosophers think that meaning is assigned than think it's inherent. Philosophers are found at the fringes of understanding, making the most abstract abstraction possible, the philosophy of mathematics, for example, tries to understand the underlying abstractions of mathematics and possibly how they work, why they work... do they really work?
the funny thing is quantum mechanics and general relativity are a 1000 times more bizarre than anything he described, although they are also supported by thousands of experiments.
God sounds sneaky.
your message is ironic. It's only by considering the relationship of phantasy and reality that youc an "wake up", especially considering the way in which the two are mixed and hard to distinguish. I would wager that you yourself have many make believe ideas held solid and real in your heart which are not real. It's the nature of the mind. The lack of meaning in the Matrix is (1) you don't have to think about these issues to watch the movie, which is entertaining for most because of it's 200% chopsaki action style. (2) the bullets aren't real... why is the second movie still looking to be about bullets (I didn't see it yet).
grammar nazis: yes, "they're" they are illegal. right, hope very much no one got confused what I meant.
"it's nice to want things"
In california, since their illegal, we would just sign them.
I'm familiar with epistomology and skepticism, what are you refering to? I thought that it raised some of the good old questions pretty well (considering how so much philophy likes to just avoid the question anyway, what with not agreeing on the answers after thousands of years of discussion.
btw, perhaps an interesting philosophic treatment would address the question, "how do they know the whole thing isn't still a part of the matrix... the blue pill might just run a program that makes you have this phantasy of leaving the matrix" (then they could try again on the entertaining near miss human-batteries idea)
>The hot dog bun was even a little dry. :)
It comes with a Hot DOG?! That is the coolest movie ever!
I was looking forward to Windows 2003 too until I found out it wasn't really going to come with a ham sandwich.
as soon as you start embedding special codes in the text to tell the printer to change fonts, or accept bitmap data, etc. etc. you start on a road that takes you toward wanting something like postscript. You could say, why do that on the printer but I would say, (1) the printer knows more than you about itself, how it really wants to render fonts vs. bitmaps, it physical margins, etc. and will do better job rendering the document than, for example, if you render it on your computer and send a bitmap (2) you should distribute processing when you can.
Plus it's fun.
The only real problem with Java is that so many kids are taking it today (I have heard it is being taught in more colleges than English), and those kids are being put in to positions they are not ready for (Bad economy, that wants cheaper labor). That coupled with the fact that it is a relatively new language screams for performance issues. This isn't the languages fault.
I think it is Java's fault. Like VB it's supposed to be the language so robust you can't hose it. Code away, think nothing of memory, automagic at your service! It promotes a totally false idea of what the pitfalls of programming really are. I could be wrong, but I don't think so.
well, regarding joking, I got the joke, and frankly, your little rant was merely an opportunity for my own, because we have both heard these things that set us off before.
As far as Java getting better. I'm open minded. The day it really performs better, I'm admitting it.
Turning to good programmers. The point is to compare like to like. Average programmer to average programmer. The Average programmer makes much faster code in C++, and can be instructed to use safe idioms to address some of the problems average programmers supposedly have with memory management issues. Good java programmers might make more repsonsive GUIs, good C++ programmers make particle simulations happen. That goodness gets more effect.
In fact, comparing good programmer to good programmers is my whole point with this efficiency question. A good programmer has no trouble mastering a compiled language, and is just as fast. I'm just feeling like I'm getting too much marketing hype in, where is the beef, as the old lady asked. Ok so there is a wide library of calls, documented in a central place. Well, there is a huge array of C++ libraries and tools too. And most of what Java offers is stuff Sun has provided VIA Java. Sun could have made a standard class system for C++ too... would we be better off? Probably.
I knew someone was going to say that. I put halve and it didn't look right. I went to dictionary.com and it was down. I then realized I didn't care too much and went with half. At least every single person will understand what I meant.