Of course a movie you download is a collection of facts. Basically, the file format states that "The first frame of the movie looks like this: [image]. The second frame of the movie differs from the first in the following ways: [list]. The third frame of the movie..."
Well, I'm off to download some collections of facts about a few movies, songs, and books.
Unless it runs without electricity it consumes that as well.
Actually, it doesn't consume electrons. The utility company basically requires that you return all electrons they give you. If it consumed them, it'd require very few, E=Mc^2 and all...
Wow, I really like your refinement. The idea (I take away from this) is that you have a limited amount to spend on this sort of thing. Until you've seen what all potential things to spend this on for the month, you don't have a good idea of how much you want to spend on any specific recipient. Once you've got a lot of candidates, you can then go back and decide which ones still stand out, and how much each gets.
Your subject line is a cliff-hanger. Why not just summarize your idea rather than require the reader to read your post to even know what the overall idea is? Suggestion: "Excellent if it becomes popular".
Re:And the zombification of our children continues
on
The Wi-Fi On the Bus
·
· Score: 1
If anything, making people shut the fuck up in the bus will help the introspective types that just want to be left alone so they can get some reading done.
Hmmm, I've never heard of this other email system called Without Opposition. Is that supposed to imply that it's so good it'll generate no opposition? But I guess Gmail proved them wrong in this case.
Please provide your real name and address, so our copyright infringement lawyer can contact you. Your posting constitutes unauthorized reproduction of our master article template.
There is money to be made both ways. If someone made an affordable indestructible, uber safe car, that had decent power and milage it would sell like crazy.
But then we'd have the problem of people crashing them into buildings and people more often, heh.
I know you were being sarcastic, but still, the thing the argument misses is the hidden cost of flying planes slowly (or not at all). For one, more people would use cars, which are less safe than planes. There would also be the reduction in general wealth and efficiency, which indirectly costs lives. Now, if a large group of people really did want such measures taken, the market would give them flights that went more slowly, took even more hours to board due to extra security checks, etc. These people surely exist, but they either aren't willing to pay the costs their approach would involve, or it's an untapped market.
"Getting killed in a car accident, by contrast, is 4,300 times more likely."
That is probably very close to the same odds as being on a plane targeted by terrorists; look how calmly we are responding to that threat.
Actually, the odds of being on a plane targeted by terrorists is probably no more than one thousandth of that. But since we go ape shit over the threat of terrorism, and its risk is at least as much as exploding batteries, then obviously we must respond to exploding batteries no differently. It's only consistent to do so.
Do NOT look directly at the sun through the telescope, of course. Instead, you use the telescope as a projector. It takes a minute or two to aim: the trick is to use the shadow from the telescope to aim. When the shadow is smallest, you're pointing the right way.)
Doesn't the sun damage the telescope itself? I thought you had to use a solar filter no matter how you viewed it. Not having much luck with Google searches, so maybe some amateur astronomers can chime in here.
Disadvantages: Can damage telescope. Might not be visible if cloudy. Not as neat as looking at planets or stars. Oh yeah, it also causes instant blindness.
Indeed. As a recovering premature optimizer, I think efficiency is a big reason people avoid breaking something into smaller parts that can be tested independently. Plus things like the Singleton pattern result in designs that are harder to test, because there are some states you cannot "rewind" back to without restarting the program.
Related: Working Effectively with Legacy Code
on
The Art of Unit Testing
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I've read several unit testing books recently, and another I found somewhat useful is Michael Feathers' Working Effectively with Legacy Code. It has all sorts of techniques for testing legacy code, i.e. code that wasn't designed for testability, and which you want to make as few modifications to. So he gets into techniques like putting a local header file to replace the normal one for some class used by the code, so that you can write a replacement class (mock) that behaves in a way that better exercises the code. Unfortunately Feathers' book is also somewhat tiring to read, due to a verbose writing style and rough editing, but I don't know anything better.
I read this book recently and found it tiring. Much of it reads like a blog, and like many books, the author randomly switches stances. He'll refer to the reader as "the reader", "you", "we", and in the third person. This is the kind of book where it's hard to keep a clear idea of what the author is talking about, because he doesn't have a clear idea of what he's trying to communicate.
When I think of tiring books like this, I cannot avoid always remembering Steve McConnel's Code Complete (first edition; I haven't looked at the second edition yet). Reading that book is like having your autonomy assaulted, because the author constantly tries to get you to accept the things he's claiming, via whatever means necessary, rather than presenting them along with rational arguments, and letting you decide when to apply them. I'm not saying Osherove's book is that bad, just that it has that same unenjoyable aspect that makes it a chore to read and get useful information from.
I recently also read Kent Beck's Test-Driven Development and highly recommend it, if you simply want to learn about unit testing and test-driven development. It's concise and enjoyable to read. Unfortunately it doesn't cover as many details, and I don't have any good alternatives to books like Osherove's (and I've read many at my local large university library).
Slashdot Mirror
Of course a movie you download is a collection of facts. Basically, the file format states that "The first frame of the movie looks like this: [image]. The second frame of the movie differs from the first in the following ways: [list]. The third frame of the movie..."
Well, I'm off to download some collections of facts about a few movies, songs, and books.
Actually, it doesn't consume electrons. The utility company basically requires that you return all electrons they give you. If it consumed them, it'd require very few, E=Mc^2 and all...
And soon thereafter there will be laws that require cameras to default to minimal EXIF data.
Funny, on all my machines, lacking Flash is a big part of them "just working."
Wow, I really like your refinement. The idea (I take away from this) is that you have a limited amount to spend on this sort of thing. Until you've seen what all potential things to spend this on for the month, you don't have a good idea of how much you want to spend on any specific recipient. Once you've got a lot of candidates, you can then go back and decide which ones still stand out, and how much each gets.
Your subject line is a cliff-hanger. Why not just summarize your idea rather than require the reader to read your post to even know what the overall idea is? Suggestion: "Excellent if it becomes popular".
So in other words, HP's new data center is heating the glacial wind. That means... they're going to melt the glaciers!!!111!
obligatory: Silence is golden.
Indeed, even Mike Tyson agrees.
Indeed, though they spun off their semiconductor division into Freescale a while back.
Hmmm, I've never heard of this other email system called Without Opposition. Is that supposed to imply that it's so good it'll generate no opposition? But I guess Gmail proved them wrong in this case.
Please provide your real name and address, so our copyright infringement lawyer can contact you. Your posting constitutes unauthorized reproduction of our master article template.
Why would you care whether fellow students are cheating? That isn't stopping you from learning.
But then we'd have the problem of people crashing them into buildings and people more often, heh.
I know you were being sarcastic, but still, the thing the argument misses is the hidden cost of flying planes slowly (or not at all). For one, more people would use cars, which are less safe than planes. There would also be the reduction in general wealth and efficiency, which indirectly costs lives. Now, if a large group of people really did want such measures taken, the market would give them flights that went more slowly, took even more hours to board due to extra security checks, etc. These people surely exist, but they either aren't willing to pay the costs their approach would involve, or it's an untapped market.
Heh, apparently someone put up a billboard saying, "Miss me yet?" with a picture of Bush.
Actually, the odds of being on a plane targeted by terrorists is probably no more than one thousandth of that. But since we go ape shit over the threat of terrorism, and its risk is at least as much as exploding batteries, then obviously we must respond to exploding batteries no differently. It's only consistent to do so.
Ahhh, that explains the popularity of the iPhone with businesses.
Doesn't the sun damage the telescope itself? I thought you had to use a solar filter no matter how you viewed it. Not having much luck with Google searches, so maybe some amateur astronomers can chime in here.
Disadvantages: Can damage telescope. Might not be visible if cloudy. Not as neat as looking at planets or stars. Oh yeah, it also causes instant blindness.
Indeed. As a recovering premature optimizer, I think efficiency is a big reason people avoid breaking something into smaller parts that can be tested independently. Plus things like the Singleton pattern result in designs that are harder to test, because there are some states you cannot "rewind" back to without restarting the program.
I've read several unit testing books recently, and another I found somewhat useful is Michael Feathers' Working Effectively with Legacy Code. It has all sorts of techniques for testing legacy code, i.e. code that wasn't designed for testability, and which you want to make as few modifications to. So he gets into techniques like putting a local header file to replace the normal one for some class used by the code, so that you can write a replacement class (mock) that behaves in a way that better exercises the code. Unfortunately Feathers' book is also somewhat tiring to read, due to a verbose writing style and rough editing, but I don't know anything better.
I read this book recently and found it tiring. Much of it reads like a blog, and like many books, the author randomly switches stances. He'll refer to the reader as "the reader", "you", "we", and in the third person. This is the kind of book where it's hard to keep a clear idea of what the author is talking about, because he doesn't have a clear idea of what he's trying to communicate.
When I think of tiring books like this, I cannot avoid always remembering Steve McConnel's Code Complete (first edition; I haven't looked at the second edition yet). Reading that book is like having your autonomy assaulted, because the author constantly tries to get you to accept the things he's claiming, via whatever means necessary, rather than presenting them along with rational arguments, and letting you decide when to apply them. I'm not saying Osherove's book is that bad, just that it has that same unenjoyable aspect that makes it a chore to read and get useful information from.
I recently also read Kent Beck's Test-Driven Development and highly recommend it, if you simply want to learn about unit testing and test-driven development. It's concise and enjoyable to read. Unfortunately it doesn't cover as many details, and I don't have any good alternatives to books like Osherove's (and I've read many at my local large university library).
If you think this sort of thing is unique to laws, you must be new to society.
In further news, this reporter was having trouble finding the "any" key on his keyboard.