Though PHP4 has a comparatively crappy object sytem
"comparitively crappy"? while i love php4 for its lightening-fast dev time and embarassingly forgiving syntax, it's oop implementation is far and away the worst i have ever seen.
php started life as a procedural language, based on the ideology the that primary component of web development was the "page" or even the "session" and that adding another logical component system (the "object") was pointless. the oop capacity of php4 was little more than a gross retrofit. if the language can't enforce private methods, or grok object cloning vs referencing then it's really not useful for oop. in fact, i would go so far as to say php4 is not an oop language, but a procedural language with some oop capabilities.
now, having said all that, it looks like the cats at zend have made a serious effort to build a meaningful oop language with php5 (i'm especially keen on exceptions) and i applaud them for taking the time to do it right. but i still stand by my initial statement: php4 isn't oop and, for the sake of the children, shouldn't be used that way.
i went through a no-cookies allowed period a couple of years ago and i quickly found something out: they're actually useful and in a lot of cases, dare i say it, desireable.
call me lazy but i actually like my login forms prefilled (name only, of course). i like my template preferences recorded. when i go to ecommerce site 'x' i honestly find it convenient to see what i bought on my last trip.
and, above all, i want to be able to maintain sessions on a lot of sites. increasintly, if you don't have cookies, holding a session is impossible (unique id's on the getline are going the way of the dodo) and, increasingly, sites want you to maintain sessions to do anything useful.
1. Arrive at uni and buy E-books (profit)
2. Months in the course starts
3. Books 'run-out'
4. Rip E-book
No step 5.
and maybe no degree either. copying the ebook is a crime and students can be punished for it. as far as the government is concerned, your plan is no different than a student who currently:
1. arrives at uni
2. holds up liquor store
3. buys text book with the proceeds
Richter knows nobody in their right mind would agree to receiving the loads of $hit he shovels
and yet, miraculously, there are people out there who buy that stuff... if there weren't there wouldn't be any spam.
if we're really going to stop junk email, these are the people we should be working on educating. think what damage could be done to the spammers' pocket book if every new copy of outlook showed a little message every time a suspected spam was opened that said "warning: unsolicited commercial email may be fraudulant".
if ms is serious about shutting down spam, they should spend less on lawyers and more on educating their end users.
ow, the US Government itself can be sued due to a vague and shitty patent!
you just gave me an awesome idea!
i'm going to rush out and apply for a patent for a system "of social control wherebey a body of individuals holding a monopoly on the sole legitimate use of force (hereafter refered to as "the state") authorizes another group of non-technical people (hereafter called "the patent office") to allocate the legitimate use, distribution or communication of highly technical ideas, conepts, plans, schematics and other 'know how'".
once i get that baby rubber stamped, i can just sue them out of existence!
I once wrote something to the effect of: "I can't recommend this laptop backpack for anyone who travels a lot," and the site neatly editted out the "can't". Never filling out one of those things again.
i'd probably try using my gpg signature... although there's no guarantee that that wouldn't be edited out as well.
correct. and software piracy isn't the drug trade either. witness:
columbian coca is grown in large fields visible from airplanes. dvds are pirated indoors away from prying eyes.
coca is grown in columbia and then must imported to the purchasing country (ie, the states). dvds can be copied at or near the point of consumption.
it's easy to detect and difficult to disguise coca and cocaine. aerial foliage colour analysis, drug sniffing dogs &c. make concealing drugs difficult. a pirated dvd can be packaged to be indistinguishable form a legit one to an untrained observer.
drugs ruin lives. pirated dvd's waste afternoons.
if anything, the war on piracy will be more difficult and reap less benefit than the war on drugs.
I'm guessing you don't consider Reuters to be trustworthy?
i do. however, i do take umbrage with the parent poster's complete lack of context! for reference, the paragraphs in question are:
Environmental campaign group Greenpeace estimates that if the project yields any results at all, it will not be until the second half of this century.
"At a time when it is universally recognized that we must reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, Greenpeace considers it ridiculous to use resources and billions of euros on this project," it said.
what this says to me is that greenpeace is saying the fusion project will probably not make a dent in greenhouse gas emissions for fifty years and we should be using that 10 billion euros to convert our polluting power sources to current solutions, such as they are.
Specifically, Greenpeace (real quote), said: " At a time when it is universally recognized that we must reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, Greenpeace considers it ridiculous to use resources and billions of euros on this project"
care to source that "real quote"?
the greenpeace press release on the fusion plant in question is here. i didn't see your quote in it anywhere.
i would further suggest that, if you are actually intetested in following greenpeace's position on this and similar matters, that you monitor to report and publication section of greenpeace eu. it's here.
the P2P developers problem was that while they did come up with legal uses the perception of them was that they did that only for their court case
so, let's get this straight:
in the united states, it's legal to sell armour-piercing ammuniction -- bullets whose sole purpose of design is to go through bullet proof vests; obviously a device designed to kill or maim human beings. the manufacturers to do not even make the pretense of proposing other uses for said ammunition. this activity is all fine and legal.
by comparision, a device that may or may not be designed for, but is certainly capable of, infringing copyright is deemed illegal. the manufacturers at least attempt the pretense of proposing legal uses for the technology and make a somewhat-better-than-marginal case for its legit use. this is not fine or legal.
question for the supreme court: do you really believe the the copyright of the bay city rollers first album is more deserving of legal protection than a human life?
well, wiki is a big bag of web-accessible content that could fit nicely into desktop applications... personally i would like to be listening to a cd on my computer, say "here come the warm jets" by brian eno, and be able to pull up a short bio on mr. eno, his complete discography, the lyrics to the current song, a list of reviews of the album and artist and the cover art for the album... all without having to fire up my web browser and performing a bunch of search-n-clicks.
One would hope that the Planetary Society had some sort of insurance
insurance? for a rocket made in russia? you could maybe get a policy for flood and theft, but beyond that i don't think any insurer would touch the thing.
// we're in deep shit now... the least we can do is note it in the error details // the array format returned from [function name] is fucked up. let's put it in a [variable name] like we want it // it's fucking magic!
variable and function names removed to protect the innocent, guilty and neutral.
We all know that their method of determining loss is flawed
it's all about elasiticity. anyone who has taken a 100-level course in economics (as have apparently the editors of "the economist". big surprise there) should know. a quick rundown is here:
most software is highly elastic to most people. playing with this or that nifty piece of software may be fun for an hour or afternoon but unless it's a killer app, they would, given the choice, opt to not use the program rather than pay.
it's like the classic example of the pay-for park. a hundred people go to the park on a sunday afternoon, so a government beurocrate determines that if the city charges a $10 admission, the profit will be $1000 every sunday. the toll gates go up but, to the surprise of the beurocrat, nobody shows up to buy a ticket.
Seriously though, this is a reasonable move for Apple to ensure that the look, feel and reliability of the MacOS does not become corrupted for some users who may want to install OS X on "lower quality hardware".
while this is true, the single biggest reason for this obvious move is this: apple is a hardware company.
since the mac came out, and even before, apple has been using revenue from hardware sales to support os development. if millions of home users stampede to emachines discount boxes for their os x platform then, apple's real source of revenue will dissappear.
I tried PHP, but I didn't feel it gave me the rigid OO structure and sophisticated APIs I get from Java, JSPs & Servlets.
but procedural is a valid way to structure your apps... especially for web-based ones where that have, by nature, a page-based model and a very linear flow. you can write serious software using php4 without oop!
Yeah, I mean pure text/command line/keyboard only is great if you're a programmer. But I need a mouse for doing art/graphics and it's much easier than having to tab 30 times till the correct hyperlink is selected in my browser.
exactly. before everyone blows their top about vim or emacs or even bbedit, let's all take a deep breath and say:
If I stole a magazine and then left it in a dentist's waiting room, would anybody think of sueing me for lost profits caused by people reading it?
no. the overwhelming majority of magazines derive the lion's share of their revenue from advertising (the cover price normally just covers distribution plus a small margin... which is why subscriptions are so damn cheap).
the advertisers will be glad for the extra eyeballs and, as long as the advertisers are happy, the publisher doesn't mind either. steal all the magazines you want: no one's gonna sue you.
Slashdot Mirror
you are aware that one of those countries is the united states, right?
"comparitively crappy"? while i love php4 for its lightening-fast dev time and embarassingly forgiving syntax, it's oop implementation is far and away the worst i have ever seen.
php started life as a procedural language, based on the ideology the that primary component of web development was the "page" or even the "session" and that adding another logical component system (the "object") was pointless. the oop capacity of php4 was little more than a gross retrofit. if the language can't enforce private methods, or grok object cloning vs referencing then it's really not useful for oop. in fact, i would go so far as to say php4 is not an oop language, but a procedural language with some oop capabilities.
now, having said all that, it looks like the cats at zend have made a serious effort to build a meaningful oop language with php5 (i'm especially keen on exceptions) and i applaud them for taking the time to do it right. but i still stand by my initial statement: php4 isn't oop and, for the sake of the children, shouldn't be used that way.
einstein was awarded the nobel prize for his brownian paper. relativity, published the same year, was all but ignored.
source:t ml
http://www.bun.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~suchii/einsteinBM.h
and who does the filtering? the government? your isp?
i went through a no-cookies allowed period a couple of years ago and i quickly found something out: they're actually useful and in a lot of cases, dare i say it, desireable.
call me lazy but i actually like my login forms prefilled (name only, of course). i like my template preferences recorded. when i go to ecommerce site 'x' i honestly find it convenient to see what i bought on my last trip.
and, above all, i want to be able to maintain sessions on a lot of sites. increasintly, if you don't have cookies, holding a session is impossible (unique id's on the getline are going the way of the dodo) and, increasingly, sites want you to maintain sessions to do anything useful.
info here and download here.
2. Months in the course starts
3. Books 'run-out'
4. Rip E-book
No step 5.
and maybe no degree either. copying the ebook is a crime and students can be punished for it. as far as the government is concerned, your plan is no different than a student who currently:
1. arrives at uni
2. holds up liquor store
3. buys text book with the proceeds
and yet, miraculously, there are people out there who buy that stuff... if there weren't there wouldn't be any spam.
if we're really going to stop junk email, these are the people we should be working on educating. think what damage could be done to the spammers' pocket book if every new copy of outlook showed a little message every time a suspected spam was opened that said "warning: unsolicited commercial email may be fraudulant".
if ms is serious about shutting down spam, they should spend less on lawyers and more on educating their end users.
you just gave me an awesome idea!
i'm going to rush out and apply for a patent for a system "of social control wherebey a body of individuals holding a monopoly on the sole legitimate use of force (hereafter refered to as "the state") authorizes another group of non-technical people (hereafter called "the patent office") to allocate the legitimate use, distribution or communication of highly technical ideas, conepts, plans, schematics and other 'know how'".
once i get that baby rubber stamped, i can just sue them out of existence!
none. but, to be fair, they do occasinally bomb them 500 lb, laser-guided missles, like this one.
i'd probably try using my gpg signature... although there's no guarantee that that wouldn't be edited out as well.
a suitably distributed pool of genetic variation has the most optimal (or, at least, the not most sub-optimal) selected for continuance.
the only part where "random" comes in, is in the creation of the distributed pool.
correct. and software piracy isn't the drug trade either. witness:
if anything, the war on piracy will be more difficult and reap less benefit than the war on drugs.
i do. however, i do take umbrage with the parent poster's complete lack of context! for reference, the paragraphs in question are:
Environmental campaign group Greenpeace estimates that if the project yields any results at all, it will not be until the second half of this century.
"At a time when it is universally recognized that we must reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, Greenpeace considers it ridiculous to use resources and billions of euros on this project," it said.
what this says to me is that greenpeace is saying the fusion project will probably not make a dent in greenhouse gas emissions for fifty years and we should be using that 10 billion euros to convert our polluting power sources to current solutions, such as they are.
care to source that "real quote"?
the greenpeace press release on the fusion plant in question is here. i didn't see your quote in it anywhere.
i would further suggest that, if you are actually intetested in following greenpeace's position on this and similar matters, that you monitor to report and publication section of greenpeace eu. it's here.
so, let's get this straight:
in the united states, it's legal to sell armour-piercing ammuniction -- bullets whose sole purpose of design is to go through bullet proof vests; obviously a device designed to kill or maim human beings. the manufacturers to do not even make the pretense of proposing other uses for said ammunition. this activity is all fine and legal.
by comparision, a device that may or may not be designed for, but is certainly capable of, infringing copyright is deemed illegal. the manufacturers at least attempt the pretense of proposing legal uses for the technology and make a somewhat-better-than-marginal case for its legit use. this is not fine or legal.
question for the supreme court: do you really believe the the copyright of the bay city rollers first album is more deserving of legal protection than a human life?
well, wiki is a big bag of web-accessible content that could fit nicely into desktop applications... personally i would like to be listening to a cd on my computer, say "here come the warm jets" by brian eno, and be able to pull up a short bio on mr. eno, his complete discography, the lyrics to the current song, a list of reviews of the album and artist and the cover art for the album... all without having to fire up my web browser and performing a bunch of search-n-clicks.
insurance? for a rocket made in russia? you could maybe get a policy for flood and theft, but beyond that i don't think any insurer would touch the thing.
grep -rn "shit\|fuck" ./* | awk 'FS="\t" {print $NF}'
variable and function names removed to protect the innocent, guilty and neutral.
it's all about elasiticity. anyone who has taken a 100-level course in economics (as have apparently the editors of "the economist". big surprise there) should know. a quick rundown is here:
http://www.quickmba.com/econ/micro/elas/ped.shtml
most software is highly elastic to most people. playing with this or that nifty piece of software may be fun for an hour or afternoon but unless it's a killer app, they would, given the choice, opt to not use the program rather than pay.
it's like the classic example of the pay-for park. a hundred people go to the park on a sunday afternoon, so a government beurocrate determines that if the city charges a $10 admission, the profit will be $1000 every sunday. the toll gates go up but, to the surprise of the beurocrat, nobody shows up to buy a ticket.
while this is true, the single biggest reason for this obvious move is this: apple is a hardware company.
since the mac came out, and even before, apple has been using revenue from hardware sales to support os development. if millions of home users stampede to emachines discount boxes for their os x platform then, apple's real source of revenue will dissappear.
and then there'll be no os x.
but procedural is a valid way to structure your apps... especially for web-based ones where that have, by nature, a page-based model and a very linear flow. you can write serious software using php4 without oop!
exactly. before everyone blows their top about vim or emacs or even bbedit, let's all take a deep breath and say:
"the right tool for the right job"
no. the overwhelming majority of magazines derive the lion's share of their revenue from advertising (the cover price normally just covers distribution plus a small margin... which is why subscriptions are so damn cheap).
the advertisers will be glad for the extra eyeballs and, as long as the advertisers are happy, the publisher doesn't mind either. steal all the magazines you want: no one's gonna sue you.
except maybe the store.
care to confirm that quote?