Regardless, the author's choice of terms plus lack of additional clarification totally muddled what he might have been trying to say.
Also, there's no context for what he's saying ("SATA without NCQ is bad"). It's like saying MySQL without foreign keys is bad, without mentioning the context that MySQL does have foreign keys these days.
While the article is good for publication in an academic journal like ACM, it's useless for the real world.
For that, the author should tell us whether most drives on the market have NCQ already or not. Popular drives like WD Green and Seagate's various lines.
Otherwise, saying "$A is useless without $Y" is pointless.
If you set single-click behavior in the file browser (Nautilus), the File Open dialogs don't also go to single click. They're still on double click.
The reason? One is provided by Gnome, the other by GTK, supposedly. Somehow, Windows and KDE manage to get this right.
2. Network fileshares in File Open dialogs.
In every organization with more than 2 people, you've got network file shares. So, let's say you want to save a file to the network. OK, File Save. Oh, wait, there are no network file shares in that dialog.
Actually, it varies from application to application. Real nice. What are you supposed to tell people? Save locally and then use the file manager to copy stuff over?
3. They should also have a Recent section in Nautilus.
4. That said, some things that Linux does right:
-Unity is miles ahead of Windows8. -It's nice that in the latest Gnome, they also include recently used folders in the Recent list. Sometimes it doesn't work, so they should look at that.
Something that's often said in combination to what you said is to keep your functions short (like 7 code lines).
Most people will whine at that, but the fact is you can't hold more than 7 lines in your head anyway. And, like you said, your code should just be a sequence of very explicit functions:
Also, I'll probably get modded down for this, but go ahead and explain how you're doing something as opposed to just why.
The fact is, if you're kneedeep in $LANGUAGE_X programming, you probably know all the ins and outs of that language, including pitfalls and workarounds. But someone who comes in 2 or 3 years later won't. So just spell it out. Maybe the next guy won't know what the arraySlice, or arrayDice or arrayCut function does exactly. Or maybe that guy will be you, having moved on to $LANGUAGE_Y fulltime.
While the intention of the CC licences may have been to encourage reuse by standardization, I find that in many areas, it's still quite murky.
For one, what's non-commercial? The FAQ doesn't quite say, other than to point you to a survey of what some people think non-commercial means, which is all over the map. If you've got a picture, and you merely reprint it, is that non-commercial? If you have ads on a page? If you're a non-profit? A non-profit selling (selling=dollars) tickets for a concert using an NC picture on a poster? Or is it only "commercial" if you're trying to resell the picture, either individually or on a CD, but mere use is not "commercial"?
It seems that NC actually restricts use to nothing more than school reports. Or would that be "commercial" if you go to a private school? Would use in a report (that you're not selling) be OK within a corporation? In the annual report? In a brochure for customers?
Then there's ND: "No Derivatives" The FAQ is equally muddy there, basically just saying that means no adaptations or modifications. OK, what's that? Can you crop or scale a picture? Or you can, if you're a lawyer?
Now, taking Wikipedia's BY-SA license: Attribution isn't a big deal, but Share Alike is a minefield: What's a derivative work? "Alter, transform, or build upon". If you incorporate portions (or even all) of the Wikipedia article on, say, Canola oil, into your annual report, is the report now CC? Or if you incorporate some or all of a Wiki article on a webpage as background info on your topic? Is the rest of the page, which you wrote, now virally infected with CC-BY-SA?
The two biggest sources of CC material are Flickr and Wikipedia. And, in the matter of a user being able to quickly know how he can use a picture or a Wiki article, he's left absolutely clueless. (Again, other than for school reports.)
This question (of robot production and jobs) has come up quite a lot on Slashdot.
One way the future could go is: Robots take over production, and there is mass unemployment. This would be a strange economy.
Another way could be: People are part-owners (shareholders) of the means of production. Companies produce stuff through automation. Companies pay dividends to shareholders. Shareholders buy the stuff with those dividends.
The problem is, how to convince people to buy stock. George Bush tried it with allowing people to invest their Social Security money in stocks, but that was quickly nixed.
Great point about Apple. Most of their income gets funneled through a shell corporation in Nevada, yet I haven't heard of people (or government officials) excoriating Apple for being a cheat like they do Amazon.
Well, if you're sending the supply ship far enough out in advance, then just make sure it arrived intact (as in video feeds) before you send the people.
I just wanted to point out the shelf life is 3 years (enough for the 2.5 planned years of a Mars mission).
It's an acquired taste.
If you have too cultured of a palate, and you're used to multi-course meals with palate cleansers in between, you probably won't last a day with MREs, much less 21.
Prior to Apple going "thermonuclear", it was just some good-natured ribbing. You like shiny white plastic? Good for you.
Now, it's different. It's kill or be killed.
And yeah, protesting corporate excess while contributing to the crazy gross margins of Apple is highly ironic (though totally lost on the protesters who still think they're sticking it to "the man" by buying iStuff).
Speaking just for myself: no. That probably goes for most other/. readers because there's an article about Apple every other day. The reason, I think, is that Slashdot's audience is upset that they won't be able to innovate in their jobs like they want to because Apple has a patent an $POLYGON_SHAPE_X or whatever.
is all the protesters at the Occupy Wall St sit-ins carrying iPhones and iPods.
The irony of the situation (1% getting richer) just did not occur to them.
Here's the biggest, richest company in the world (and possibly in history if you don't count inflation) with.10 $trillion in the bank. And it's still greedy on piddling stuff like connectors, which it changes just for the sake of it (selling more).
Apple deserves to be right up there in the same category as Goldman Sachs.
Lol. Seriously, though, I'll bet you some rounded rectangles that Apple's behind this story one way or another.
It's all out war for Apple, including psy-ops. So, of course, they'd need to balance out all that "Apple's sweatshops" articles with equivalent articles for Samsung.
Slashdot Mirror
I just found this post today:
AT&T (yeah, them) is the one that invented a grid of colorful icons, half a decade before Apple.
http://www.statusq.org/archives/2012/08/30/4453/
Add this to the prior art file.
>You might find some suspect vegetables in a supermarket (anywhere in the USA) which is why you should cook pretty much everything.
Does that mean no salad?
Regardless, the author's choice of terms plus lack of additional clarification totally muddled what he might have been trying to say.
Also, there's no context for what he's saying ("SATA without NCQ is bad"). It's like saying MySQL without foreign keys is bad, without mentioning the context that MySQL does have foreign keys these days.
We're talking about ATA drives?
As in non-SATA drives?
Who has those anymore?
While the article is good for publication in an academic journal like ACM, it's useless for the real world.
For that, the author should tell us whether most drives on the market have NCQ already or not. Popular drives like WD Green and Seagate's various lines.
Otherwise, saying "$A is useless without $Y" is pointless.
1. There's a really old (10 year) bug:
If you set single-click behavior in the file browser (Nautilus), the File Open dialogs don't also go to single click. They're still on double click.
The reason? One is provided by Gnome, the other by GTK, supposedly. Somehow, Windows and KDE manage to get this right.
2. Network fileshares in File Open dialogs.
In every organization with more than 2 people, you've got network file shares. So, let's say you want to save a file to the network. OK, File Save. Oh, wait, there are no network file shares in that dialog.
Actually, it varies from application to application. Real nice.
What are you supposed to tell people? Save locally and then use the file manager to copy stuff over?
3. They should also have a Recent section in Nautilus.
4. That said, some things that Linux does right:
-Unity is miles ahead of Windows8.
-It's nice that in the latest Gnome, they also include recently used folders in the Recent list. Sometimes it doesn't work, so they should look at that.
Something that's often said in combination to what you said is to keep your functions short (like 7 code lines).
Most people will whine at that, but the fact is you can't hold more than 7 lines in your head anyway. And, like you said, your code should just be a sequence of very explicit functions:
adjustColor();
scalePicture();
cropPicture();
addWatermark();
and the same in each of those functions.
(These guys say 62, YMMV)
Yeah, this.
Also, I'll probably get modded down for this, but go ahead and explain how you're doing something as opposed to just why.
The fact is, if you're kneedeep in $LANGUAGE_X programming, you probably know all the ins and outs of that language, including pitfalls and workarounds. But someone who comes in 2 or 3 years later won't. So just spell it out. Maybe the next guy won't know what the arraySlice, or arrayDice or arrayCut function does exactly. Or maybe that guy will be you, having moved on to $LANGUAGE_Y fulltime.
While the intention of the CC licences may have been to encourage reuse by standardization, I find that in many areas, it's still quite murky.
For one, what's non-commercial? The FAQ doesn't quite say, other than to point you to a survey of what some people think non-commercial means, which is all over the map. If you've got a picture, and you merely reprint it, is that non-commercial? If you have ads on a page? If you're a non-profit? A non-profit selling (selling=dollars) tickets for a concert using an NC picture on a poster? Or is it only "commercial" if you're trying to resell the picture, either individually or on a CD, but mere use is not "commercial"?
It seems that NC actually restricts use to nothing more than school reports. Or would that be "commercial" if you go to a private school? Would use in a report (that you're not selling) be OK within a corporation? In the annual report? In a brochure for customers?
Then there's ND: "No Derivatives" The FAQ is equally muddy there, basically just saying that means no adaptations or modifications. OK, what's that? Can you crop or scale a picture? Or you can, if you're a lawyer?
Now, taking Wikipedia's BY-SA license: Attribution isn't a big deal, but Share Alike is a minefield: What's a derivative work? "Alter, transform, or build upon". If you incorporate portions (or even all) of the Wikipedia article on, say, Canola oil, into your annual report, is the report now CC? Or if you incorporate some or all of a Wiki article on a webpage as background info on your topic? Is the rest of the page, which you wrote, now virally infected with CC-BY-SA?
The two biggest sources of CC material are Flickr and Wikipedia. And, in the matter of a user being able to quickly know how he can use a picture or a Wiki article, he's left absolutely clueless. (Again, other than for school reports.)
This question (of robot production and jobs) has come up quite a lot on Slashdot.
One way the future could go is:
Robots take over production, and there is mass unemployment. This would be a strange economy.
Another way could be: People are part-owners (shareholders) of the means of production. Companies produce stuff through automation. Companies pay dividends to shareholders. Shareholders buy the stuff with those dividends.
The problem is, how to convince people to buy stock. George Bush tried it with allowing people to invest their Social Security money in stocks, but that was quickly nixed.
Speaking of OSHA: fire hazard because of cardboard?
Really?
And there aren't all sorts of other cardboard boxes lying around the office?
Not to mention ... paper?
Great point about Apple. Most of their income gets funneled through a shell corporation in Nevada, yet I haven't heard of people (or government officials) excoriating Apple for being a cheat like they do Amazon.
What would you do for mental stimulation for a year?
Well, if you're sending the supply ship far enough out in advance, then just make sure it arrived intact (as in video feeds) before you send the people.
I just wanted to point out the shelf life is 3 years (enough for the 2.5 planned years of a Mars mission).
It's an acquired taste.
If you have too cultured of a palate, and you're used to multi-course meals with palate cleansers in between, you probably won't last a day with MREs, much less 21.
Prior to Apple going "thermonuclear", it was just some good-natured ribbing. You like shiny white plastic? Good for you.
Now, it's different. It's kill or be killed.
And yeah, protesting corporate excess while contributing to the crazy gross margins of Apple is highly ironic (though totally lost on the protesters who still think they're sticking it to "the man" by buying iStuff).
'nuff said
Speaking just for myself: no. That probably goes for most other /. readers because there's an article about Apple every other day. The reason, I think, is that Slashdot's audience is upset that they won't be able to innovate in their jobs like they want to because Apple has a patent an $POLYGON_SHAPE_X or whatever.
is all the protesters at the Occupy Wall St sit-ins carrying iPhones and iPods.
The irony of the situation (1% getting richer) just did not occur to them.
Here's the biggest, richest company in the world (and possibly in history if you don't count inflation) with .10 $trillion in the bank. And it's still greedy on piddling stuff like connectors, which it changes just for the sake of it (selling more).
Apple deserves to be right up there in the same category as Goldman Sachs.
What's a int64_t and how does it differ from a long? Or is it something from the latest, new-fangled C standards?
Reminds of of Microsoft's wide int definition types from their Windows programming header files.
Yeah, and that would be favoring Intel over AMD.
Why? Because Intel's supposed to be the "default" and AMD is only just "compatible" with it?
In fact, AMD's the one who created AMD64, and Intel licensed it from them.
>you'll need to use a PAE kernel
Is that even a problem? Ubuntu, for one, automatically uses the PAE, AFAIK, because I didn't tell it to do anything after upgrading from 2GB to 6GB.
These low UID users are so old, they've been replaced by Beowulf clusters of nanobots that remember every single Slashdot post ever.
That's for the phone itself. The icons are round so the workers inside the phone can't slash their wrists.
Well, that doesn't apply to appropriations.
So, basically, the business of the United States government can continue on.
But it might be hard to pass new laws (creating new messes).
Some people like that.
Lol. Seriously, though, I'll bet you some rounded rectangles that Apple's behind this story one way or another.
It's all out war for Apple, including psy-ops. So, of course, they'd need to balance out all that "Apple's sweatshops" articles with equivalent articles for Samsung.