Let's face it, a CS grad would come out of a good program looking to build stuff in all her favorite languages and paradigms, but lo and behold, there's legacy code, greybeards who swear by C, managers demanding that you code to standards so new hires can read your stuff.... All the things that didn't matter really back in the academy but are cruelly part of computing in private industry.
But that's not a "good" program, that's a bad one. A good program would teach algorithms, design, and team working and at least three languages, one of which should be Lisp, just because it lets them know there are other paradigms out there. That will teach flexibility and allow students to cope with legacy and oddball systems. Learning Java is simply not good enough. Indeed, I would say that learning C and Smalltalk would give anyone the tools to walk into a Java post with a week's notice, and many other posts too.
Get them all doing assembler, that what I say. Assemble some sense into 'em!
My point was that the current system assumes that there is no need for the scientist at all. That's not true, even though it is a smaller need than programmers (in whatever languages).
Undergraduate courses are not the place for vocational training no matter how good the stats look for the government.
A tech degree of any kind, no matter how full of yourself you are, is not going to take you where it once might. That's reality.
And that's partly because no one did anything about it as degrees (of all sorts) were devalued in order to allow governments to crow about the fact that 60,70,80% of the population were getting degrees, and never mind the fact that the degrees were so easy as to be meaningless.
When I was employing people a couple of years ago I quickly found that there was no point in filtering based on qualifications and instead just wrote a short exam paper to see which applicants really did know some computer science. Degrees are just junk bonds now.
If you don't need to be a math major then don't be one. But don't stand around saying it doesn't matter if no one is anymore because every course is aimed at people that feel like you. It does matter because that path leads to stagnation. The world needs Java programmers, sure, but it also needs people that understand computer science and can go on to advance the subject for the rest of us and future generations. A Micky Mouse degree course will not provide that.
And what should stop Dell et al from producing and selling PCs with a cell processor?
There is a danger for the tier-1 suppliers that Microsoft drags its feet getting into a new architecture which goes on to beat intel (unlikely to happen, but that might be the very thought that holds MS back). While Mac and Linux systems are appearing using the new chip, they'll be held back by their deals with MS from supplying the hardware (remember: a machine without Windows is a machine for piracy!). It's possible that someone else will dash in and take the new market, leaving the old market to whither away. Dell etc would then be in a very weak position once they broke away from MS's stranglehold on their businesses, or alternatively MS finally realses a CELL-Windows.
It could happen but it's more likely that if CELL takes off, MS will have an alpha version of Windows running on it quite quickly and that will keep them in the game for the next three years as they try to get a version that does more than Minesweeper working. That's basically what happened with Intel and x86-64; Intel was so slow that in any free market they would have been overwhelmed by the competition, who were years ahead of them. But the market isn't free and Intel are almost as strong now as they ever were.
To run the latest near-4GHz CPU's from intel, you need to mount a whopping great water cooling system to handle the heat.
A massive part of which is the antiquated Pentium (ie, 8086) architecture screaming at the force needed to run at those levels. I doubt that the cell will run as hot as a single P4. I don't think it'll be fanless, of course, but it will be much better off thermally.
You really have the most distorted view of the steaming pile of crap that is the blogosphere I've read in years.
Any search engine that finds a way to ignore blogs is going to have a realistic crack at Google (unless Google finally manage to filter them out itself, of course).
You are of course free to download and redistribute the Open Source Edition, but you need to comply with the provisions of the GPL (distribute source with the binary, accept the freedom of your users to redistribute and modify the source).
I think the point the OP was making was that there is a difference between using and distributing. If I am IT-guru for a company and write an in-house program for our workers to use on their workstations, Trolltech can not require that the source be made available, despite that being a commercial setting. If we give it/sell it to another company then we must do so. The grey area in the GPL is how it fits with the notion of a company as being the individual. Are the workers really not users? Is installing the software on workstations really not distribution as per the GPL?
is really is a minimal event for the overall market
Being allowed to successfully sue over a help icon is not a minimal event. Bad judgements like these are used as precedents in later cases regardless of the importance of the initial trial. Many a bad law has been formed on the basis of a neighbour's hedge.
That is what parents are for though. I do not think the state should decide.
And if you are unlucky enough to have crap parents? Say, alcoholic parents?
I do think they should be allowed to serve them if the customer desires.
So you reject the idea that some people should be protected from themselves? What happens if I kill you and then claim that you asked me to? The state has to step in at some point and say that it is better to err on the safe side than to simply give everyone carte blance to do whatever they like in private, otherwise the old and the young can get exploited. And do, even with the state intervening as it does now.
What you are really saying is that you do not believe in society or culture, that the individual is, or should be, the sole arbiter of what actions and behaviour is acceptable.
I'm not particularly bothered if that is your position, but I wonder if you have really thought about how tough and unpleasant a world that would be in practice.
And again, if a person passing this law really believes that such material damages the ability of developing people to form socially respectful personalities, isn't it actually a case of restricting public action, just as your examples were? If I'm unable to become a member of normal social units and vent any frustration in an aggressive way, isn't that just as dangerous to the public as the 4-year-old in the car?
The question behind that question is: do violent games and other media affect children's behaviour? And the answer to that is: "What are you? Thick? Of course they fucking do! Jesus Christ, man, kids are programmed to learn by example!! How could it not? If they can learn from parents and other kids, not to mention church and books, what the hell's so special about games that they have no effect? Huh?".
So, I'm cautiously in favour of limiting access by age, even though it is a huge generalisation, but then all laws are. The trick is to find the optimal and forget about the ideal because, in society, there is no such thing.
Adults, however need to be allowed to make much, much wider choicies otherwise you end up with a ruling elite who decide what is and isn't allowed. Inevitably, this means they control the nation for their own benefit. They're usually called "priests".
The reasoning behind this is you allowed everyone to vote, you have the have-nots passing 'gimmee' bills to award themselves at the expense of the property owners.
Instead you have the "haves" passing "keepsies" bills to protect the monopolies they inherited from their long-dead ancestors from start-ups from the commoners.
Yes, generally speaking. Is there some reason you think that a 17 year old person would not be less capable of sensible, informed and rational action than that same person twenty years later? If not, then you are agreeing that the more experienced members of society have a reasonable cause to act in that younger person's interest even if their inexperience means that they can not appreciate the interference.
Also, this law is not seen by its supporters as taking anyone's rights away, it is seen as protecting people. And, frankly, as long as they are not saying that they are banning the games totally, simply restricting their use to adults as is already done with booze and automobiles, then that's fine.
The constitution leaves a lot of common sense things out (and in some cases specifically allows things which are insane) but that does not mean they should not be allowed. What part of the constitution says that you should drive on the right? Or wear clothes? Or not serve broken glass to people in sandwiches? Doesn't mean that laws about these things are invalid
Sure didn't stop you from jumping to an utterly wrongheaded conclusion, did it?
I might have added that I've used Apple GUIs since the days of Lisa and that there's been a steady decine in the quality of the front end. Luckily the decline has been matched by a decline in how often I use them.
I'm buying a MiniMac next month, but it'll never even be booted into OS/X; Gentoo will be in the drive the moment it's powered up. Lovely little machine.
They made a mistake and now, as the article says, it's too late to fix it because the number of single-button mice out there means app-writers can't make any use of extra buttons.
Why Apple has to pretend that such an obvious blunder was some visionary breakthrough and why the rest of us have to pretend that it renders Macs useless is beyond me. The GUI, not the mouse, on OS/X renders it useless to my mind but since I don't own a Mac and only have to use one for work occasionally, I don't think I need to worry about it.
Just don't ask me to live without my three-button mouse, that's all.
Slashdot Mirror
Carly was in marketing before she took over HP. I mention this today at random, you understand.
TWW
TWW
But that's not a "good" program, that's a bad one. A good program would teach algorithms, design, and team working and at least three languages, one of which should be Lisp, just because it lets them know there are other paradigms out there. That will teach flexibility and allow students to cope with legacy and oddball systems. Learning Java is simply not good enough. Indeed, I would say that learning C and Smalltalk would give anyone the tools to walk into a Java post with a week's notice, and many other posts too.
Get them all doing assembler, that what I say. Assemble some sense into 'em!
TWW
Ah ha! I'm not AT work.
TW
Not employing bloggers at all seems a fair enough policy to me. Why pay someone to sit all day and think of "witty" things to write to other wasters?
TWW
My point was that the current system assumes that there is no need for the scientist at all. That's not true, even though it is a smaller need than programmers (in whatever languages).
Undergraduate courses are not the place for vocational training no matter how good the stats look for the government.
TWW
And that's partly because no one did anything about it as degrees (of all sorts) were devalued in order to allow governments to crow about the fact that 60,70,80% of the population were getting degrees, and never mind the fact that the degrees were so easy as to be meaningless.
When I was employing people a couple of years ago I quickly found that there was no point in filtering based on qualifications and instead just wrote a short exam paper to see which applicants really did know some computer science. Degrees are just junk bonds now.
If you don't need to be a math major then don't be one. But don't stand around saying it doesn't matter if no one is anymore because every course is aimed at people that feel like you. It does matter because that path leads to stagnation. The world needs Java programmers, sure, but it also needs people that understand computer science and can go on to advance the subject for the rest of us and future generations. A Micky Mouse degree course will not provide that.
Now I'm ranting.
TWW
Have you done that?
TWW
There is a danger for the tier-1 suppliers that Microsoft drags its feet getting into a new architecture which goes on to beat intel (unlikely to happen, but that might be the very thought that holds MS back). While Mac and Linux systems are appearing using the new chip, they'll be held back by their deals with MS from supplying the hardware (remember: a machine without Windows is a machine for piracy!). It's possible that someone else will dash in and take the new market, leaving the old market to whither away. Dell etc would then be in a very weak position once they broke away from MS's stranglehold on their businesses, or alternatively MS finally realses a CELL-Windows.
It could happen but it's more likely that if CELL takes off, MS will have an alpha version of Windows running on it quite quickly and that will keep them in the game for the next three years as they try to get a version that does more than Minesweeper working. That's basically what happened with Intel and x86-64; Intel was so slow that in any free market they would have been overwhelmed by the competition, who were years ahead of them. But the market isn't free and Intel are almost as strong now as they ever were.
TWW
A massive part of which is the antiquated Pentium (ie, 8086) architecture screaming at the force needed to run at those levels. I doubt that the cell will run as hot as a single P4. I don't think it'll be fanless, of course, but it will be much better off thermally.
TWW
Any search engine that finds a way to ignore blogs is going to have a realistic crack at Google (unless Google finally manage to filter them out itself, of course).
TWW
TWW
TWW
I think the point the OP was making was that there is a difference between using and distributing. If I am IT-guru for a company and write an in-house program for our workers to use on their workstations, Trolltech can not require that the source be made available, despite that being a commercial setting. If we give it/sell it to another company then we must do so. The grey area in the GPL is how it fits with the notion of a company as being the individual. Are the workers really not users? Is installing the software on workstations really not distribution as per the GPL?
TWW
Being allowed to successfully sue over a help icon is not a minimal event. Bad judgements like these are used as precedents in later cases regardless of the importance of the initial trial. Many a bad law has been formed on the basis of a neighbour's hedge.
TWW
And if you are unlucky enough to have crap parents? Say, alcoholic parents?
I do think they should be allowed to serve them if the customer desires.
So you reject the idea that some people should be protected from themselves? What happens if I kill you and then claim that you asked me to? The state has to step in at some point and say that it is better to err on the safe side than to simply give everyone carte blance to do whatever they like in private, otherwise the old and the young can get exploited. And do, even with the state intervening as it does now.
What you are really saying is that you do not believe in society or culture, that the individual is, or should be, the sole arbiter of what actions and behaviour is acceptable.
I'm not particularly bothered if that is your position, but I wonder if you have really thought about how tough and unpleasant a world that would be in practice.
And again, if a person passing this law really believes that such material damages the ability of developing people to form socially respectful personalities, isn't it actually a case of restricting public action, just as your examples were? If I'm unable to become a member of normal social units and vent any frustration in an aggressive way, isn't that just as dangerous to the public as the 4-year-old in the car?
The question behind that question is: do violent games and other media affect children's behaviour? And the answer to that is: "What are you? Thick? Of course they fucking do! Jesus Christ, man, kids are programmed to learn by example!! How could it not? If they can learn from parents and other kids, not to mention church and books, what the hell's so special about games that they have no effect? Huh?".
So, I'm cautiously in favour of limiting access by age, even though it is a huge generalisation, but then all laws are. The trick is to find the optimal and forget about the ideal because, in society, there is no such thing.
Adults, however need to be allowed to make much, much wider choicies otherwise you end up with a ruling elite who decide what is and isn't allowed. Inevitably, this means they control the nation for their own benefit. They're usually called "priests".
TWW
Not long after his 106th birthday. I think he'd rather enjoy going out like that!
TWW
Which is how the photon and the constant "i" were discovered. See: sometimes it works.
TWW
Instead you have the "haves" passing "keepsies" bills to protect the monopolies they inherited from their long-dead ancestors from start-ups from the commoners.
TWW
Yes, generally speaking. Is there some reason you think that a 17 year old person would not be less capable of sensible, informed and rational action than that same person twenty years later? If not, then you are agreeing that the more experienced members of society have a reasonable cause to act in that younger person's interest even if their inexperience means that they can not appreciate the interference.
Also, this law is not seen by its supporters as taking anyone's rights away, it is seen as protecting people. And, frankly, as long as they are not saying that they are banning the games totally, simply restricting their use to adults as is already done with booze and automobiles, then that's fine.
The constitution leaves a lot of common sense things out (and in some cases specifically allows things which are insane) but that does not mean they should not be allowed. What part of the constitution says that you should drive on the right? Or wear clothes? Or not serve broken glass to people in sandwiches? Doesn't mean that laws about these things are invalid
TWW
Well, quite.
TWW
2 bucks per gallon pretty well is for free.
TWW
I might have added that I've used Apple GUIs since the days of Lisa and that there's been a steady decine in the quality of the front end. Luckily the decline has been matched by a decline in how often I use them.
I'm buying a MiniMac next month, but it'll never even be booted into OS/X; Gentoo will be in the drive the moment it's powered up. Lovely little machine.
TWW
AND a dark scabrous lying, thieving shit-hole. You can be both, you know.
TWW
Why Apple has to pretend that such an obvious blunder was some visionary breakthrough and why the rest of us have to pretend that it renders Macs useless is beyond me. The GUI, not the mouse, on OS/X renders it useless to my mind but since I don't own a Mac and only have to use one for work occasionally, I don't think I need to worry about it.
Just don't ask me to live without my three-button mouse, that's all.
TWW