Sheesh, why do we even debate this anymore? In all the user polls I've seen, vi always comes in around 50-60% and emacs is around 10%. NO ONE (effectively) USES IT!
And yes, often the most popular is not the best, but this isn't one of those times. The only people who don't like or don't prefer vi are people who don't understand vi (hint: the secret to the power is the 'dot' command).
While other groups will always contain members that will hold mad, bad and obviously wrong beliefs not matter what, a geek will always
change beliefs based on evidence and a solid reasoned argument based on axioms they share.
Then how do you explain all the geek socialists?
Here's how: The typical "geek" likes rationality, but is generally very bad at understanding human relationships. This is why geeks often make very bad managers, and in fact often have bad experiences with managers.
So when you go to a geek and say, for example, "We have poor people. How do we solve the problem?" The natural, geek-oriented solution would be to say, "Clearly we need the government to give these people money so that they can subsist long enough to find gainful employment. And clearly, this should be done at the highest levels of government, since a central authority is bound to more efficient than a bunch of non-organized, local governments that will have variable levels of quality".
The solution is simple, easy-to-understand -- and a dismal failure. Because of the lack of understanding of human nature, which geeks very rarely can factor in. They think everyone strives to do the best they can to "solve the problem once and for all, and move on the next problem". Unfortunately, this is a rare trait.
A geek cannot even concieve of people who would go out and try to keep people in poverty so that they will continue to have a job and a budget. Yet, those people exist.
My knowledge of electronics is old and musty, but couldn't you load the schematics into SPICE or other electronics simulator and fire it up? I would think that there are simulators that can do video output.
The Real Thing
on
High Score
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Yeah, books are nice, but there's nothing like the real thing. Ever desired to own almost every video game ever made? Yeah, everyone knows about MAME, but perhaps you don't know about Tombstones, which is network of volunteers who will send you CD-ROMS of all of the MAME roms -- for about $7. 3,486 roms (about 1900 unique games, I think).
It's unbelievable how much game you can put in about 4K of ROM space.
Now, what I want to know is when is SOMEONE going to make a hardware emulator of Death Race. The schematics are available on the web. [it didn't you use a microprocessor... all electronic! ]
Ah, but in creative writing it's permissible to break rules for stylistic purposes. The canonical example would be Charles Dickens, Tale of Two Cities:
It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us..."
By any formal measure, this is a horrible sentence. Yet by breaking the rules, it is one of the most famous openings of any novel.
But, far more importantly, mad propz to the WSJ for knowing the difference between "less" and "fewer".
The "use 'fewer' for counting, 'less' for measurements" rule is really pretty obscure and useless. Only the truly pedantic care about that rule. On the other hand...
theres no other explanation for that, right?
The apostrophe rule for contractions IS an important, useful rule.
Re:I'll support anything that gets rid of Billy Ba
on
Fritz's Hit List
·
· Score: 3, Funny
First they first came for the Billy Bass and I didn't speak up because I hated Billy Bass.
Then they came for the Spam and I didn't speak
up because I hated Spam.
They came for the browser mods that pop up ads depending on my site visits, and I didn't speak up because I hated Gator.
Then they came for my TiVo, and they had to pry it out of my cold, dead hand.
[With apologies to Pastor Martin Niemoller]
Actually, I think this hit list is totally stupid. Half the things on that list wouldn't fall under the law.
yes, I know, it's fucking annoying that different forms of speech have different levels of protectection, but such is the case according to all of my friends in law school
Er, just out of curiosity, why would you expect anything else? Libel, slander, Yell-fire-crowded-theatre are obvious examples of speech that don't deserve the same protection as political speech.
I was like -4.00 and -3.75. I had Lasik a few years ago. Now I see about 20/25 and 20/20. I have the halos at night.
I have to admit, initially I was somewhat disappointed because my vision definitely wasn't as sharp as it was when it was fine-tuned with my contact lenses. But to tell you the truth, now I don't even think about it. My vision is definitely "good enough" and I'm glad I did it. Being free of any vision correction is really, really nice. The halos at night used to be somewhat annoying, but I've pretty much gotten used to them and they don't bother me.
One big advantage is that my eyes don't get as fatigued from wearing contact lenses at the end of the day, and I find that to be an advantage in late night programming sessions.
For me, the positives outweighed the negatives, but unfortunately there's no way to really know for yourself without doing it.
I would personally avoid using terms that have specific legal interpretations like "libel" or "slander" when writing the letter myself. It sounds pretentious and, well, overdramatic.
I agree. It would probably be better said more informally, as you say.
I should also say that if you don't trust yourself to write the letter so that it sounds sufficiently threatening without being overdramatic or whiny, it's pretty cheap (relatively speaking) to get a lawyer to draft a letter for you. That also has the benefit of making it look more like your serious. I'm just always too cheap to use a lawyer, and I'm generally good at writing threating letters.:)
Here's what I would do: write a letter to the CEO in question. Don't rant or rave, but explain the nature of the Klez virus in non-technical terms. Attach a description from one of the major anti-virus manufacturers as proof of your assertions.
Then drop the bomb. WITHOUT WHINING (that is VERY important), and without OVERDRAMATIZING IT (also VERY important), warn him that his actions may constitute libel and/or slander, and that any further attempts to harm your reputation will be delt with through legal means.
Try something like this: "Finally, I have tried to be patient. I hope that this explanation has convinced you that I have no role whatsoever in your virus infestation. I know that not everyone is technical, and things like this can be difficult to understand. However, it's a small industry and I will not allow my reputation to be damaged through libellous and/or slanderous accusations. Cease and desist immediately or I will be forced to take legal action."
You might also think about filing a complaint with the FBI that the guy knowingly filed a false accusation.
Insofar as slashdotism is the unfettered persuit of self interest it is libertarian.
Libertarianism is not "unfettered" pursuit of self interest, it's the "fair" pursuit of self interest where everyone has a level playing field. Of course, "level playing field" is a loaded statement, since many people believe that the government should "level" the field through a lot of artificial means. But that's a debate for another day. I will say this: contrary to popular opinion, Libertarians are NOT for monopolies, and most support action where it's warranted. [aside: probably few think Microsoft is warranted, and I would probably agree]
Slashdotism often wants to take from the producers of society and give it to everyone else. That's socialism.
The problem is that the essence of libertariaism is the rejection of all social obligations.
Once again, although I don't subscribe to Libertarian philosphy in all its "beauty", I have to defend them on this. Libertarians believe very strongly in social obligations -- through neighbor to neighbor obligations, not government to neighbor. The government forcibly taking from one person to give to another breeds resentment in the takee, and the faceless nature of it breeds dependency on the taker. Not to mention the extreme inefficiency. For these reasons, charity should be done voluntarily and locally.
Slashdotism is all about community
To some extent; OSS is often about community. But don't fool yourself that stealing music, software or patents is about community. That's about blatent "gimme gimme gimme for free".
In the same way that black-and-white TVs switched to color, we really think displays are going to switch to 3-D," Stephen Bold, managing director of Sharp Laboratories of Europe Ltd, said after a news conference.
I hate to throw the wet blanket over 10 years of research, but I got news for both the pointy heads and the marketing department: Going from being able to have friends over to watch TV from different positions around the room to requiring everyone to look at a certain angle (and probably occupy the same space at the same time) is NOT an improvement over existing displays, 3D notwithstanding.
There might be specialized applications, but to compare this to the change from B&W to color television is absolutely absurd.
Call me when you have THREE DIMENSIONAL television that I can see from ANY angle. Then I'll be interested. I'll actually be impressed when I can walk around the image and see different angles.
Cool, a classical violinist who can't spell Isaac Perlman's last name.
Sheesh, cut the guy some slack. I bet there are a LOT of programmers out there who can't spell the last names of people they happen to know of ("Dykstra" comes to mind, which I'm probably misspelling right now).
Isn't it a basic tennet of copyright law that once you become aware of a violation of your IP, you must enforce that copyright or you forfeit your right to it?
No, you're thinking of trademarks, commonly called "trademark dilution". Copyrights stay no matter what you do.
At least to my eyes (or ears) this is like suggesting: instead of buying "With a Little Help from my Friends" from Joe Cocker, buy it from the Beatles.
It's not exactly the same situation, since you can't buy a recording of Mozart performing his own music.
I agree with you that there are distinct differences between recordings; in fact, many Baroque recordings are done with "original" instruments versus using modern instruments.
But if I'm Joe Amateur and I want a copy of The Four Seasons because I like it, I'm probably not familiar enough with the various styles of orchestras to make that judgment. Sure, if I heard a particular rendition that I particularly likes, I might go after that particular one. But I think there is more similarity between the typical classical recording than there is between the Beatles and Joe Cocker, so there is less reason to seek out particular flavors.
Yeah and SOOO many people listen to Classical music.
Huh? You must be young. Sorry dude, but music doesn't survive for 300 years if no one listens to it. And they'll be listening to it in another 300 years. Think they'll still be listening to the latest release of "L33t D3ath P1zza" in 300 years?
I should have mentioned that this is not true for most classical music, where someone may very well compare prices between the Boston, London and New York symphony orchestras who are probably all interchangeably excellent. [there are certainly exceptions to this, of course]
Meanwhile, the RIAA doesn't feel the same logic applies to record sales in the U.S., and has started an ad campaign to convince the public that sharing music hurts artists.
Sheesh, talk about missing the point of the article. The article is talking about developing markets, not the US. Microsoft cares deeply about piracy in the US. The point is that in developing markets, Microsoft wants to establish a foothold.
The other difference is that Microsoft has competition, while there is no direct competition for music. In other words, if you don't like the price of Bruce Springsteen, you're not going to switch to Broos Sprigstein who might be cheaper.
One interesting idea that David Brin put in his Uplift books is that his extremely advanced civilizations don't even have a very developed system of symbolic math. Since the computers of these civilizations are so fast, you can pretty much calculate a working approximation of anything for any practical purpose, and the idea of an "exact" answer is simply useless. Presumably these cultures "solved" math at some point in the distant past, but moved on once the intellectual challenge was gone.
I always thought that was one of the more interesting ideas of the books, and something that I could see actually happening in a few thousand years.
It is an executable plus the loadable modules. That is not what a monolithic kernel meant in 1992. Single executable means single executable. Period.
I simply don't understand why you think this is relevent to anything.
What is a monolothic kernel? A kernel that executes with directly-called subroutines. What is a monolothic kernel with loadable modules? A kernel that executes with directly-called subroutines.
What is a microkernel? A kernel that executes with message passing to services running in processes. What is a microkernel with dynamic linking? A kernel that executes with message passing to services running in processes.
This is what you seem determined to miss: The difference between a monolithic kernel and a microkernel is MESSAGE PASSING. How the kernel is linked is completely irrelevent.
Do you believe that the Mach OS X kernel is a monolithic kernel?
I don't know enough about it say definitively. But you can figure it out for yourself: if it uses message passing to separate processes, it's a microkernel. Otherwise, it's a monolithic kernel.
Slashdot Mirror
Sheesh, why do we even debate this anymore? In all the user polls I've seen, vi always comes in around 50-60% and emacs is around 10%. NO ONE (effectively) USES IT!
And yes, often the most popular is not the best, but this isn't one of those times. The only people who don't like or don't prefer vi are people who don't understand vi (hint: the secret to the power is the 'dot' command).
While other groups will always contain members that will hold mad, bad and obviously wrong beliefs not matter what, a geek will always change beliefs based on evidence and a solid reasoned argument based on axioms they share.
Then how do you explain all the geek socialists?
Here's how: The typical "geek" likes rationality, but is generally very bad at understanding human relationships. This is why geeks often make very bad managers, and in fact often have bad experiences with managers.
So when you go to a geek and say, for example, "We have poor people. How do we solve the problem?" The natural, geek-oriented solution would be to say, "Clearly we need the government to give these people money so that they can subsist long enough to find gainful employment. And clearly, this should be done at the highest levels of government, since a central authority is bound to more efficient than a bunch of non-organized, local governments that will have variable levels of quality".
The solution is simple, easy-to-understand -- and a dismal failure. Because of the lack of understanding of human nature, which geeks very rarely can factor in. They think everyone strives to do the best they can to "solve the problem once and for all, and move on the next problem". Unfortunately, this is a rare trait.
A geek cannot even concieve of people who would go out and try to keep people in poverty so that they will continue to have a job and a budget. Yet, those people exist.
You forgot to move the case statements to the same indentation level as the switch statement.
My knowledge of electronics is old and musty, but couldn't you load the schematics into SPICE or other electronics simulator and fire it up? I would think that there are simulators that can do video output.
Here's are a bunch of screenshots.
Yeah, books are nice, but there's nothing like the real thing. Ever desired to own almost every video game ever made? Yeah, everyone knows about MAME, but perhaps you don't know about Tombstones, which is network of volunteers who will send you CD-ROMS of all of the MAME roms -- for about $7. 3,486 roms (about 1900 unique games, I think).
It's unbelievable how much game you can put in about 4K of ROM space.
Now, what I want to know is when is SOMEONE going to make a hardware emulator of Death Race. The schematics are available on the web. [it didn't you use a microprocessor... all electronic! ]
Ah, but in creative writing it's permissible to break rules for stylistic purposes. The canonical example would be Charles Dickens, Tale of Two Cities:
By any formal measure, this is a horrible sentence. Yet by breaking the rules, it is one of the most famous openings of any novel.
But, far more importantly, mad propz to the WSJ for knowing the difference between "less" and "fewer".
The "use 'fewer' for counting, 'less' for measurements" rule is really pretty obscure and useless. Only the truly pedantic care about that rule. On the other hand...
theres no other explanation for that, right?
The apostrophe rule for contractions IS an important, useful rule.
First they first came for the Billy Bass and I didn't speak up because I hated Billy Bass.
Then they came for the Spam and I didn't speak up because I hated Spam.
They came for the browser mods that pop up ads depending on my site visits, and I didn't speak up because I hated Gator.
Then they came for my TiVo, and they had to pry it out of my cold, dead hand.
[With apologies to Pastor Martin Niemoller]
Actually, I think this hit list is totally stupid. Half the things on that list wouldn't fall under the law.
yes, I know, it's fucking annoying that different forms of speech have different levels of protectection, but such is the case according to all of my friends in law school
Er, just out of curiosity, why would you expect anything else? Libel, slander, Yell-fire-crowded-theatre are obvious examples of speech that don't deserve the same protection as political speech.
I was like -4.00 and -3.75. I had Lasik a few years ago. Now I see about 20/25 and 20/20. I have the halos at night.
I have to admit, initially I was somewhat disappointed because my vision definitely wasn't as sharp as it was when it was fine-tuned with my contact lenses. But to tell you the truth, now I don't even think about it. My vision is definitely "good enough" and I'm glad I did it. Being free of any vision correction is really, really nice. The halos at night used to be somewhat annoying, but I've pretty much gotten used to them and they don't bother me.
One big advantage is that my eyes don't get as fatigued from wearing contact lenses at the end of the day, and I find that to be an advantage in late night programming sessions.
For me, the positives outweighed the negatives, but unfortunately there's no way to really know for yourself without doing it.
Wait, you don't have options in the Winders werld...
Good Lord! You're right! There are no options to emulate Windows under Windows!!
Another example of where the advantages of Linux know no bounds. Alert the press! This is the "killer advantage" we've all been waiting for.
I would personally avoid using terms that have specific legal interpretations like "libel" or "slander" when writing the letter myself. It sounds pretentious and, well, overdramatic.
I agree. It would probably be better said more informally, as you say.
I should also say that if you don't trust yourself to write the letter so that it sounds sufficiently threatening without being overdramatic or whiny, it's pretty cheap (relatively speaking) to get a lawyer to draft a letter for you. That also has the benefit of making it look more like your serious. I'm just always too cheap to use a lawyer, and I'm generally good at writing threating letters. :)
...is often the best defense.
Here's what I would do: write a letter to the CEO in question. Don't rant or rave, but explain the nature of the Klez virus in non-technical terms. Attach a description from one of the major anti-virus manufacturers as proof of your assertions.
Then drop the bomb. WITHOUT WHINING (that is VERY important), and without OVERDRAMATIZING IT (also VERY important), warn him that his actions may constitute libel and/or slander, and that any further attempts to harm your reputation will be delt with through legal means.
Try something like this: "Finally, I have tried to be patient. I hope that this explanation has convinced you that I have no role whatsoever in your virus infestation. I know that not everyone is technical, and things like this can be difficult to understand. However, it's a small industry and I will not allow my reputation to be damaged through libellous and/or slanderous accusations. Cease and desist immediately or I will be forced to take legal action."
You might also think about filing a complaint with the FBI that the guy knowingly filed a false accusation.
Insofar as slashdotism is the unfettered persuit of self interest it is libertarian.
Libertarianism is not "unfettered" pursuit of self interest, it's the "fair" pursuit of self interest where everyone has a level playing field. Of course, "level playing field" is a loaded statement, since many people believe that the government should "level" the field through a lot of artificial means. But that's a debate for another day. I will say this: contrary to popular opinion, Libertarians are NOT for monopolies, and most support action where it's warranted. [aside: probably few think Microsoft is warranted, and I would probably agree]
Slashdotism often wants to take from the producers of society and give it to everyone else. That's socialism.
The problem is that the essence of libertariaism is the rejection of all social obligations.
Once again, although I don't subscribe to Libertarian philosphy in all its "beauty", I have to defend them on this. Libertarians believe very strongly in social obligations -- through neighbor to neighbor obligations, not government to neighbor. The government forcibly taking from one person to give to another breeds resentment in the takee, and the faceless nature of it breeds dependency on the taker. Not to mention the extreme inefficiency. For these reasons, charity should be done voluntarily and locally.
Slashdotism is all about community
To some extent; OSS is often about community. But don't fool yourself that stealing music, software or patents is about community. That's about blatent "gimme gimme gimme for free".
do not subscribe to the Slashdot libertarianism
It's Slashdot socialism, not libertarianism. [I'm not a libertarian, but if I was, I would be insulted at the accusation. :) ]
In the same way that black-and-white TVs switched to color, we really think displays are going to switch to 3-D," Stephen Bold, managing director of Sharp Laboratories of Europe Ltd, said after a news conference.
I hate to throw the wet blanket over 10 years of research, but I got news for both the pointy heads and the marketing department: Going from being able to have friends over to watch TV from different positions around the room to requiring everyone to look at a certain angle (and probably occupy the same space at the same time) is NOT an improvement over existing displays, 3D notwithstanding.
There might be specialized applications, but to compare this to the change from B&W to color television is absolutely absurd.
Call me when you have THREE DIMENSIONAL television that I can see from ANY angle. Then I'll be interested. I'll actually be impressed when I can walk around the image and see different angles.
Cool, a classical violinist who can't spell Isaac Perlman's last name.
Sheesh, cut the guy some slack. I bet there are a LOT of programmers out there who can't spell the last names of people they happen to know of ("Dykstra" comes to mind, which I'm probably misspelling right now).
Isn't it a basic tennet of copyright law that once you become aware of a violation of your IP, you must enforce that copyright or you forfeit your right to it?
No, you're thinking of trademarks, commonly called "trademark dilution". Copyrights stay no matter what you do.
At least to my eyes (or ears) this is like suggesting: instead of buying "With a Little Help from my Friends" from Joe Cocker, buy it from the Beatles.
It's not exactly the same situation, since you can't buy a recording of Mozart performing his own music.
I agree with you that there are distinct differences between recordings; in fact, many Baroque recordings are done with "original" instruments versus using modern instruments.
But if I'm Joe Amateur and I want a copy of The Four Seasons because I like it, I'm probably not familiar enough with the various styles of orchestras to make that judgment. Sure, if I heard a particular rendition that I particularly likes, I might go after that particular one. But I think there is more similarity between the typical classical recording than there is between the Beatles and Joe Cocker, so there is less reason to seek out particular flavors.
Yeah and SOOO many people listen to Classical music.
Huh? You must be young. Sorry dude, but music doesn't survive for 300 years if no one listens to it. And they'll be listening to it in another 300 years. Think they'll still be listening to the latest release of "L33t D3ath P1zza" in 300 years?
while there is no direct competition for music.
I should have mentioned that this is not true for most classical music, where someone may very well compare prices between the Boston, London and New York symphony orchestras who are probably all interchangeably excellent. [there are certainly exceptions to this, of course]
Meanwhile, the RIAA doesn't feel the same logic applies to record sales in the U.S., and has started an ad campaign to convince the public that sharing music hurts artists.
Sheesh, talk about missing the point of the article. The article is talking about developing markets, not the US. Microsoft cares deeply about piracy in the US. The point is that in developing markets, Microsoft wants to establish a foothold.
The other difference is that Microsoft has competition, while there is no direct competition for music. In other words, if you don't like the price of Bruce Springsteen, you're not going to switch to Broos Sprigstein who might be cheaper.
One interesting idea that David Brin put in his Uplift books is that his extremely advanced civilizations don't even have a very developed system of symbolic math. Since the computers of these civilizations are so fast, you can pretty much calculate a working approximation of anything for any practical purpose, and the idea of an "exact" answer is simply useless. Presumably these cultures "solved" math at some point in the distant past, but moved on once the intellectual challenge was gone.
I always thought that was one of the more interesting ideas of the books, and something that I could see actually happening in a few thousand years.
It is an executable plus the loadable modules. That is not what a monolithic kernel meant in 1992. Single executable means single executable. Period.
I simply don't understand why you think this is relevent to anything.
What is a monolothic kernel? A kernel that executes with directly-called subroutines. What is a monolothic kernel with loadable modules? A kernel that executes with directly-called subroutines.
What is a microkernel? A kernel that executes with message passing to services running in processes. What is a microkernel with dynamic linking? A kernel that executes with message passing to services running in processes.
This is what you seem determined to miss: The difference between a monolithic kernel and a microkernel is MESSAGE PASSING. How the kernel is linked is completely irrelevent.
Do you believe that the Mach OS X kernel is a monolithic kernel?
I don't know enough about it say definitively. But you can figure it out for yourself: if it uses message passing to separate processes, it's a microkernel. Otherwise, it's a monolithic kernel.