Why do these discs have to rotate? How about rotating just the spindle, inside the hub, directing the read/write laser? The reference laser for interference can shine from a fiber around the circumference, or from one side or the other. Rotating the disc is a waste of energy and time.
"Questions raised by Internet crime and international speech [...] already vex the developed world, and they're currently being handled without any comprehensive international framework in place to deal with them.
The Convention at least gives us a place to start."
So we haven't even figured out basic answers to the first problems of international Internet "crimes" at the local level, so we're enforcing those broken laws in a global framework on billions of people. France and Germany are part of the EU, relatively small and consistent in their culture (compared to "Europe + America"), and even share an open border. Their approach apparently works for their local billing lawyers, even if not for their people. Based on that basic failure, we're adopting the same framework for everyone.
That's not "a place to start". That's "a bad place to end up".
Now that "you have nothing to hide, so why do you care that Bush is tapping your phone" argument is looking pretty masochistic. Do you have nothing to hide from some some foreign government shipping your overseas relatives to concentration camps? Or just a foreign government whose leader's brother is searching for bank accounts to crack?
Does anyone believe that your personal rights have any value to the US government when it invokes "essential interests" to protect some US jurisdiction from this treaty? Or just the "essential interests" in keeping Enron's and Halliburton's books closed from foreign auditors?
In the early 1990s, I picked up a weird old guy, with long hair/beard and fingernails but exremely clean, in the late dark of night in the Santa Cruz (CA) mountains. He wanted a ride to the beach, so I took him over on my way home. He was pretty quiet at first, but as we passed the airport on US1 outside Half Moon Bay he started talking aircraft. And movies - he knew all these backstories from the "Golden Age", up until the mid 1960s. When we got to politics, he muttered "Nixon" and clammed up again. I dropped him off and lost him in the dunes near the pier. He was the most articulate and most fastidious bum I ever picked up, so I thought about him from time to time after that.
Boy was I surprised to see Leonardo Di Caprio playing him in a movie on cable this Spring.
I can't wait to see what the first, original layer of Archimedes' Palimpsest, the one Archimedes erased for blanks, contained. Maybe we'll have to backdate some of that "Archimedean" knowledge to someone else.
The American Way: wave a (made in China) American flag whenever something has an American label, and turn your back on anything even vaguely "foreign".
How about that Microsoft monopoly abuse decision? They abuse Americans. How about that MS corporate tax payment? They don't pay any, but Americans have to pay for all the government services they consume - including all the government SW revenue we pay for.
Linux, on the other hand, is an essential tool for millions of taxpaying Americans. Which represents the best American traditions of hard individual work paying off in results rewarded by merit, not corporate leverage. And it's an immigrant which has brought its experience to build America, in the best American tradition.
gcc is the first round of code review. It tells me whether my code is good enough to execute - what it does when it executes is another question:). But the next round is "tar-zcf project.v1.c.tgz project.c; tar -zxf project.x.v1.tgz project; ls -l project.?.v1.tgz", then comparing the ratios of the series of compressed source to executable files. The closer the compressed source size is to its compressed executable size, the more efficient is the code. And the more ineffecient is the process of other people reading and understanding it:).
Actually, you've got everything backwards. You're the one putting OOP on a pedestal. You're the one saying that it's not possible to write good programs that aren't OOP. You're the one saying that the OOP technique I mentioned, references to common code objects, defines OOP with one good idea.
I just posted about how copy/paste isn't always bad. I mentioned an OOP reason why, which is also just a good programming reason. You then went nuts.
Maybe if you start having these debates with yourself out loud, or with your shrink, you won't have to have them with me.
Right. I was hoping for at least a discussion on client UI paradigms ("Save As..." button vs "save on load" event etc), or client-side sandbox/virus issues, or just client-side vs server-side storage.
My own basic take on the use case is client-side caching (maybe in a cookie) as states change to meaningful "milestone" state points, stored persistently at the server, all by the applet POSTing URLs without needing to update the GUI.
Actually, what I had in mind was that bookmarking you mentioned. I should have been more clear in a post to an AJAX development thread. But it's also been interesting seeing state-saving advice for the server.
A better way to ask might have been to ask how to offer AJAX client users better state saving features than, say, Flash offers.
If you wrote that original post which decided that I knew nothing about OOP, despite the OO technique I mentioned, and nothing inconsistent with OOP, you'd have to be pretty stupid and arrogant. If you posted as an Anonymous Coward, with some obnoxious insults, you'd have some flames coming, because it would be obvious you knew nuthin' about nuthin'.
Don't give me any crap about my ego when I'm slapping back some bitchass AC. It says more about your ego than anything else.
FWIW, you think I started out in OOP by switching Apple Computer from Pascal to C++?
Try to think about what the info in these posts represents before you think you're in a position to be condescending.
Chinese company will preinstall Linux when American competitors will not. Instead they're sticking with Microsoft, even when the new MS OS won't be good for customers for years. This country is really starting to look stupid from every angle.
I've downloaded Firefox myself at least 40 times. And not for every version, certainly not the first several releases. And not including the automatic updates.
If Firefox counts all those in the 200 million, there's probably less than a million people downloading.
Anonymous jackass Coward, you should have spent that minute reading the line in my post that said
"By which I mean factoring common code into its own scope, then pasting a reference to it."
Sometimes known as "object oriented programming". Since I helped Apple Computer move from their Pascal toolbox to C++ over a decade ago, I'd say that I know more about OOP than you'll ever know about anything.
"Was the modified code the victim of a copy-and-paste job?"
I want the code to be copy/paste every time, if it works and is maintainable, rather than sparkling new code. Why would I want some robot enforcing some need to reinvent the wheel every time I need to roll?
If this thing is going to be smart, it would look at code to replace with code elsewhere in the repository. I'm tired of doing that myself, and not copy/pasting enough. By which I mean factoring common code into its own scope, then pasting a reference to it.
In reality, no one has automated the ripping business so there is no employee doing the ripping. So the question of whether the employee has the right to rip for the instance owner is the question.
The fact is that I spoke with several lawyers and businessmen over the past 5+ years about these scenarios. Everyone thinks more or less the same thing, and most of them used or recognized the term "Kinko's Rule". Maybe we're all wrong. But that's governing the "fair use reproduction" industry. It might be defacto, but that's the rule.
Which goes to my point: how is Circuit City going to get away with these duplications? In your world, its employees have even less rights than in mine. But they're doing it anyway.
That's the game. We're all playing it that way, regardless of the differences you cite. Except apparently Circuit City. How do you explain that?
"Copyright" is the right of a person to copy something. The copyrighted content does not have the copyright, the person does (or does not).
The "Kinko's Rule" demonstrates how copyright is not transferable, even under fair use. Let's say I have a book I bought. My fair use includes the copyright to photocopy pages, an entire chapter, for my personal consumption. If I'm a teacher, that even includes giving copies of a chapter (though not the whole book) to, say, 30 people in a class I teach. I go to Kinko's; I walk up to a photocopier; I set it to 30 copies; I turn the pages through the chapter on the machine; I collect the 30 copies of the chapter; I pass them out to each person in my class. No problem - I have the copyright to use the book's content fairly that way.
But if I take that book to the Kinko's service desk, ask the Kinko's employee (or even just another customer with extra time on their hands) to copy the book for an otherwise identical usage scenario, I'm not allowed. Because the employee does not have the copyright to fairly use that book for anything (except maybe reading it as borrowed by a "friend"), because they did not obtain any copyrights by buying the book. The fair use copyrights I have on the book I bought are not transferable to another person - they are not contained in the book I physically pass to the employee, they are contained in the transaction of buying (and thereby owning) the book.
This rule is the same when I bring a CD or DVD to Kinko's. I could use their burner to copy them for myself. But not for distribution to other people, though fair use of audio and video recordings does allow me to lend a single copy to a "friend", though I'm not allowed to use my own copy while another copy is loaned out. The rule says I cannot leave my CD or DVD with someone else at Kinko's to copy for me. And of course that rule applies to Circuit City, too.
So how is Circuit City ripping these DVDs for users? In the last five years, several small companies started up to rip CDs for people, violating the Kinko's Rule. They were all told (I heard the warnings personally) by lawyers and copyright owners/"enthusiasts" that they were breaking the law, that their income would be siezed whenever a copyright owner wanted to sue them. That's the main reason why we haven't been able to have our media ripped from the physical media that traps so much value out of play: the small companies that always innovate fast ("entrepreneurs") have been stopped by legal intimidation.
Now Circuit City is doing it anyway. Will they be stopped by the Kinko's Rule, and kill the whole business for everyone, even those who have been getting away serving with the consumer demand "below the radar"? Or will they demonstrate (in court, perhaps) that the Kinko's Rule is out of business? Or will some kind of "big corporation" collusion between the RIAA/MPAA and Circuit City just leave them alone, while enforcing the Kinko's Rule on entrepreneurs, keeping them (us) from competing?
I've got the last Steely Dan record, Everything Must Go, released DVD-Audio in 2003. It's good (for an after the gold rush album), but I'm not that familiar with it because it plays only in my DVD player. Not in my many CD players, including my car. The enclosed video of Becker/Fagen rolling in a taxi, picking up Vegas latenighters, was hilarious, but I'm not sure that it was worth the ghetto the format forced the disc into.
It's outrageous that anything I posted is even controversial after all we've seen in our world. But apparently 40% wear the Anonymous white hood Coward robes, and want to burn your neighbor to death.
Slashdot Mirror
Why do these discs have to rotate? How about rotating just the spindle, inside the hub, directing the read/write laser? The reference laser for interference can shine from a fiber around the circumference, or from one side or the other. Rotating the disc is a waste of energy and time.
Moderation +1
40% Insightful
20% Troll
20% Informative
23% of Americans are authoritarian lemmings who worship power. 20% TrollMod seems about right - even encouraging.
"Questions raised by Internet crime and international speech [...] already vex the developed world, and they're currently being handled without any comprehensive international framework in place to deal with them.
The Convention at least gives us a place to start."
So we haven't even figured out basic answers to the first problems of international Internet "crimes" at the local level, so we're enforcing those broken laws in a global framework on billions of people. France and Germany are part of the EU, relatively small and consistent in their culture (compared to "Europe + America"), and even share an open border. Their approach apparently works for their local billing lawyers, even if not for their people. Based on that basic failure, we're adopting the same framework for everyone.
That's not "a place to start". That's "a bad place to end up".
Now that "you have nothing to hide, so why do you care that Bush is tapping your phone" argument is looking pretty masochistic. Do you have nothing to hide from some some foreign government shipping your overseas relatives to concentration camps? Or just a foreign government whose leader's brother is searching for bank accounts to crack?
Does anyone believe that your personal rights have any value to the US government when it invokes "essential interests" to protect some US jurisdiction from this treaty? Or just the "essential interests" in keeping Enron's and Halliburton's books closed from foreign auditors?
In the early 1990s, I picked up a weird old guy, with long hair/beard and fingernails but exremely clean, in the late dark of night in the Santa Cruz (CA) mountains. He wanted a ride to the beach, so I took him over on my way home. He was pretty quiet at first, but as we passed the airport on US1 outside Half Moon Bay he started talking aircraft. And movies - he knew all these backstories from the "Golden Age", up until the mid 1960s. When we got to politics, he muttered "Nixon" and clammed up again. I dropped him off and lost him in the dunes near the pier. He was the most articulate and most fastidious bum I ever picked up, so I thought about him from time to time after that.
Boy was I surprised to see Leonardo Di Caprio playing him in a movie on cable this Spring.
I can't wait to see what the first, original layer of Archimedes' Palimpsest, the one Archimedes erased for blanks, contained. Maybe we'll have to backdate some of that "Archimedean" knowledge to someone else.
The American Way: wave a (made in China) American flag whenever something has an American label, and turn your back on anything even vaguely "foreign".
How about that Microsoft monopoly abuse decision? They abuse Americans. How about that MS corporate tax payment? They don't pay any, but Americans have to pay for all the government services they consume - including all the government SW revenue we pay for.
Linux, on the other hand, is an essential tool for millions of taxpaying Americans. Which represents the best American traditions of hard individual work paying off in results rewarded by merit, not corporate leverage. And it's an immigrant which has brought its experience to build America, in the best American tradition.
gcc is the first round of code review. It tells me whether my code is good enough to execute - what it does when it executes is another question :). But the next round is "tar-zcf project.v1.c.tgz project.c; tar -zxf project.x.v1.tgz project; ls -l project.?.v1.tgz", then comparing the ratios of the series of compressed source to executable files. The closer the compressed source size is to its compressed executable size, the more efficient is the code. And the more ineffecient is the process of other people reading and understanding it :).
Actually, you've got everything backwards. You're the one putting OOP on a pedestal. You're the one saying that it's not possible to write good programs that aren't OOP. You're the one saying that the OOP technique I mentioned, references to common code objects, defines OOP with one good idea.
I just posted about how copy/paste isn't always bad. I mentioned an OOP reason why, which is also just a good programming reason. You then went nuts.
Maybe if you start having these debates with yourself out loud, or with your shrink, you won't have to have them with me.
Right. I was hoping for at least a discussion on client UI paradigms ("Save As..." button vs "save on load" event etc), or client-side sandbox/virus issues, or just client-side vs server-side storage.
My own basic take on the use case is client-side caching (maybe in a cookie) as states change to meaningful "milestone" state points, stored persistently at the server, all by the applet POSTing URLs without needing to update the GUI.
Actually, what I had in mind was that bookmarking you mentioned. I should have been more clear in a post to an AJAX development thread. But it's also been interesting seeing state-saving advice for the server.
A better way to ask might have been to ask how to offer AJAX client users better state saving features than, say, Flash offers.
If you wrote that original post which decided that I knew nothing about OOP, despite the OO technique I mentioned, and nothing inconsistent with OOP, you'd have to be pretty stupid and arrogant. If you posted as an Anonymous Coward, with some obnoxious insults, you'd have some flames coming, because it would be obvious you knew nuthin' about nuthin'.
Don't give me any crap about my ego when I'm slapping back some bitchass AC. It says more about your ego than anything else.
FWIW, you think I started out in OOP by switching Apple Computer from Pascal to C++?
Try to think about what the info in these posts represents before you think you're in a position to be condescending.
How many different people use those 50 computers?
Chinese company will preinstall Linux when American competitors will not. Instead they're sticking with Microsoft, even when the new MS OS won't be good for customers for years. This country is really starting to look stupid from every angle.
I've downloaded Firefox myself at least 40 times. And not for every version, certainly not the first several releases. And not including the automatic updates.
If Firefox counts all those in the 200 million, there's probably less than a million people downloading.
I'm talking about saving an AJAX page I'm using as a consumer in my browser. I should have been more clear in a message to a developer audience.
Anonymous jackass Coward, you should have spent that minute reading the line in my post that said
"By which I mean factoring common code into its own scope, then pasting a reference to it."
Sometimes known as "object oriented programming". Since I helped Apple Computer move from their Pascal toolbox to C++ over a decade ago, I'd say that I know more about OOP than you'll ever know about anything.
How do I save an AJAX page in a given state, rather than just a state that will be "rebooted" on reload from storage?
"Was the modified code the victim of a copy-and-paste job?"
I want the code to be copy/paste every time, if it works and is maintainable, rather than sparkling new code. Why would I want some robot enforcing some need to reinvent the wheel every time I need to roll?
If this thing is going to be smart, it would look at code to replace with code elsewhere in the repository. I'm tired of doing that myself, and not copy/pasting enough. By which I mean factoring common code into its own scope, then pasting a reference to it.
"What if you were able to perform a portion of your code reviews automatically?"
:).
You mean like "gcc project.c"? Without that, I'd have to be in marketing
In reality, no one has automated the ripping business so there is no employee doing the ripping. So the question of whether the employee has the right to rip for the instance owner is the question.
Tell all that to Kinko's, which lets you copy your own books on their machines, but won't copy your book (unless its title page says ©.
The fact is that I spoke with several lawyers and businessmen over the past 5+ years about these scenarios. Everyone thinks more or less the same thing, and most of them used or recognized the term "Kinko's Rule". Maybe we're all wrong. But that's governing the "fair use reproduction" industry. It might be defacto, but that's the rule.
Which goes to my point: how is Circuit City going to get away with these duplications? In your world, its employees have even less rights than in mine. But they're doing it anyway.
That's the game. We're all playing it that way, regardless of the differences you cite. Except apparently Circuit City. How do you explain that?
"Copyright" is the right of a person to copy something. The copyrighted content does not have the copyright, the person does (or does not).
The "Kinko's Rule" demonstrates how copyright is not transferable, even under fair use. Let's say I have a book I bought. My fair use includes the copyright to photocopy pages, an entire chapter, for my personal consumption. If I'm a teacher, that even includes giving copies of a chapter (though not the whole book) to, say, 30 people in a class I teach. I go to Kinko's; I walk up to a photocopier; I set it to 30 copies; I turn the pages through the chapter on the machine; I collect the 30 copies of the chapter; I pass them out to each person in my class. No problem - I have the copyright to use the book's content fairly that way.
But if I take that book to the Kinko's service desk, ask the Kinko's employee (or even just another customer with extra time on their hands) to copy the book for an otherwise identical usage scenario, I'm not allowed. Because the employee does not have the copyright to fairly use that book for anything (except maybe reading it as borrowed by a "friend"), because they did not obtain any copyrights by buying the book. The fair use copyrights I have on the book I bought are not transferable to another person - they are not contained in the book I physically pass to the employee, they are contained in the transaction of buying (and thereby owning) the book.
This rule is the same when I bring a CD or DVD to Kinko's. I could use their burner to copy them for myself. But not for distribution to other people, though fair use of audio and video recordings does allow me to lend a single copy to a "friend", though I'm not allowed to use my own copy while another copy is loaned out. The rule says I cannot leave my CD or DVD with someone else at Kinko's to copy for me. And of course that rule applies to Circuit City, too.
So how is Circuit City ripping these DVDs for users? In the last five years, several small companies started up to rip CDs for people, violating the Kinko's Rule. They were all told (I heard the warnings personally) by lawyers and copyright owners/"enthusiasts" that they were breaking the law, that their income would be siezed whenever a copyright owner wanted to sue them. That's the main reason why we haven't been able to have our media ripped from the physical media that traps so much value out of play: the small companies that always innovate fast ("entrepreneurs") have been stopped by legal intimidation.
Now Circuit City is doing it anyway. Will they be stopped by the Kinko's Rule, and kill the whole business for everyone, even those who have been getting away serving with the consumer demand "below the radar"? Or will they demonstrate (in court, perhaps) that the Kinko's Rule is out of business? Or will some kind of "big corporation" collusion between the RIAA/MPAA and Circuit City just leave them alone, while enforcing the Kinko's Rule on entrepreneurs, keeping them (us) from competing?
I've got the last Steely Dan record, Everything Must Go, released DVD-Audio in 2003. It's good (for an after the gold rush album), but I'm not that familiar with it because it plays only in my DVD player. Not in my many CD players, including my car. The enclosed video of Becker/Fagen rolling in a taxi, picking up Vegas latenighters, was hilarious, but I'm not sure that it was worth the ghetto the format forced the disc into.
Moderation +1
30% Insightful
40% Troll
30% Underrated
It's outrageous that anything I posted is even controversial after all we've seen in our world. But apparently 40% wear the Anonymous white hood Coward robes, and want to burn your neighbor to death.