There is a correlation between having chain saws and chainsaw accidents, between having telephones and wasting time gossiping, between doors and fingers slammed in doors. On a more personal note, also between posting on/. and not getting any work done.
What is so sensational about a tool that can be used both positively and negatively.
All that can be true when you tell the truth too. For instance, imagine your wife asking "Are you cheating on me?"
You're starting with the assumption that the truth can't hurt, and that assumption seems quite obviously false.
No, he's not starting with that assumption. He was saying: 1. If is is given that you are going to tell the truth. 2. You can easily recite the truth without the contmeplation that *must* go into making something up that is still coherent.
You are confusing the difference between deciding whether to tell the truth or to lie, and actually concocting the lie itself. However, I don't think that it would be completely unreasonable to consider that an aspect of lying, albeit a prelimenary one. If one were to claim that it was not part of lying, that would then imply that telling the truth was not a default action.
Look at it this way though (listed from least throught to most thought): Don't consider lying, and of course, tell the truth. Consider lying, but then tell the truth. Consider lying, and then lie.
That would possibly break down if one were to lie reflexivly, with no thought to creating the lie.
prosecutors throughout the country now worry about juries that refuse to accept eyewitness accounts
This is not neccesarily a bad thing. Eyewitnesses are exremely untrustworthy.
I remember this story that I heard in a psych class (prof claims it's true):
Vicky the victim is sitting at home and watching TV, Unammed Man breaks in and assaults her. She tells the cops she knows exactly what the guy looks like, describes him to a 'T' and then proceeds to immediately pick him out of a lineup, no hesitation, she's that sure.
There's only one problem, the guy has an alibi, a pretty good one at that, he was being interviewed on the live news when the break-in happened.
http://www.instant-essays.com/psychology/eyewitn es ses-reliability.shtml
Having juries put more weight on physical evidence, and less on testimony of an eyewitness would be a boon to the wrongly-accused-community of the US
From an artist's perspective and from someone who is (or seems very much to be) outside of the linux love-fest, what do you think of the various free tools(both in current usablility and/or distance from usability) for doing art, or arting? ie. the GIMP, Sodipodi, Kontour, Xfig, Inkscape
the USA must... declare war on the abstract concept Science.
I beleive that you are not aware of a certain faction that is currenly in control of the white house. i.e. global warming isn't real, mercury is the groundwater is good for you.
one has to wonder whether airing such a controvercial movie on the eve of an election helps or hurts the political process by influencing the vote with last-minute emotions rather than thoroughly contemplation."
As opposed to the recent speeches at the RNC?
Zell Miller, who told lots of "Truths" (Propaganda that purports to be unbiased),
or the Terminator, who made that comment about girly men, now there is a thoughtful issue.
Personally, I would rather watch something where the bias has been admitted and is known.
If liberals have a heightened sense of fear, then why do all of the censervatives seem to think that America needs to attack any country that has muslims in it before the muslims start a Jihad/Holy war/WW3?
There is this right wing guy at work that never stops saying 'Life is like a dark alley'.
Everything that the government is doing points to a (wolfovitz doctrine themed) neo-conservative doctrine of 'hit them before they have the chance to think about pondering whether they might like to begin to have the capability to hit us'. And the liberals are the scared ones?
that's why there isn't a 1 before the. If you want to wait until there is, then it will be ready for automagic operations. If you want firefox now, well then, deal.
It seems that all I hear about obstacles to Linux challenging MS for the desktop revolve around Linux being cryptic and too hard to use. Pardon my saying so, but does anyone else see a relation to not having everything run graphically and beautifully (read memory consuming)? If not then I am way off base, but as I see it, for all of your eye candy to work with the average user, you need to have everything available graphically, and there is only so much that you can drop into swap before things get clunky.
Some may say that making the desktop leaner would alleviate this memory footprint, but at what cost? Would it make things harder for a new user?
You can't have it both ways. If you don't like the way that KDE, Gnome or whatever are going, don't use them. That is the wonder of OS. However, major distros are going to attempt to appeal to the new-to-linux crowd.
Personally I find that galeon and evolution use so much more memory than my WM that the whole argument is academic; I need more memory than that anyway.
Besides, hardware is going to be free in the future anyway so who cares right?
I have to know what I am doing before I start. If I want to quickly highlight somehting and then move it into another app I use middle click, but if I plan to replace exising text then I copy/paste. I have yet to find an application that I use regularly that does not support a paste that does not involve the middle button.
The issue here is keeping your 'clipboards' straight in your mind. Remember what is in you middle button clipboard, yout Ctl+c clipboard, and what is in your Ctrl+k killring.
If I ever do select to paste, and then realize that I am planning on replacing text, I put the cursor at the beginning of the text to replace middle click and then Ctrl+k to eradicate the old text. Because the cursor moves to the end of the new text but is still before the old text I have my new text and no old text.
Granted, this is a little more complicted than the ms Cc Cv paradigm. But the linux setup allows more flexibility and power. If more complicated and more powerful does not describe Linux perfectly then I must be using a different OS than you.
My issues revolve around hitting ctrl-a ctrl-k in abiword or OO and trying to turn my entire document into a link.
>This depends on the web being up all the time. (which it mostly, but not always is)
RTFA, or RTFC. Get through ten comments and you will find some other idiot who also seems to think that IBM hadn't considered the nature of web access before you.
>If you take your MBA and start your own company. If you hire the best coders in the world who are guaranteed to produce the most efficient code does this help you produce a successful product?
I agree that most of the commercial software out there does not need that sort of level of quality, but it depends on what my company makes. If I am producing shitty software that will run on an XP recommended system; who gives a crap? The importance of speed, size and efficiency (not to mention the lack of memory leaks) doesn't matter much. The important thing is features that will draw in buyers, especially for home systems. BUT If I'm doing some work for someone who is competing for the X-prize, or a new generation of the mars rover, or one of those cool video surgery systems. Then yes the most efficient code does help me to produce a successful product. In fact, there are some cases where it is necessary to production of a successful product.
In addition to that, if your coders pay no attantion to what they are doing and produce a product that bogs down the whole machine, you may be the first to market with a shitty product that gets blown out of the water two months later by someone who knows what they are doing (unless you have incredible market presence already(read are ms) in which case, you can take your time anyway).
I agree with you that the next generation in weatherbug software certianly does not need mission critical efficiency. My point is that there are other things that do, and you have no way of making that differentiation unless you understand it.
Tying this back in to CS majors, the lesson here is: If you don't mind doing a job that you can take no pride in that may evaporate to India in a few years, then you don't need to understand that mathematics behind your code. If however, you would like to work on something exiting and revolutionary that will be allowing you to develop your skills and push the bleeding edge of computing (where you need every cycle that you can get). Well, you better pay attention in those math classes.
Your post displays an interesting point. Using an advanced data structure versus two nested loops is an obvious choice. Or is it?
I did not say that the choice was obvious. I said: "[W]hy would I possibly have to write this with an advanced data structure" is a stupid question.
I was applying this thought to the number of times that I had heard this in regard to a homework assignment, not if you ever had to write a towers of hanoi program in the real world. (I know, it's recursion, not ADS)
The question is stupid when you are learning how to write your programs. To claim that the question is not stupid would be the equivalent of saying that nested loops were the right tool for every job. In order to learn when to use and not use nested loops, you need to know the options and to understand them.
> Is it good to know advanced data structures? Of course. But more important is knowing when to use them and when not to use them. Quite right. I agree completely. I was not saying that knowing how to write them was more important than knowing when to write them. But you can't know when to write them without knowing how to write them.
>CS majors have a hard time realizing that 9 times out of 10 time to market is more critical than computational costs. I'm glad that they are the ones writing code for life critical systems. I'll have an MBA in addition to my CS in three weeks, and I can tell you: Ther are no classes about depending on programmers for advice concerning time to market, that's not thier job.
As a side note, CS people have a hard time being told by a manager "Do your job fast and produce a substandard product so I can do my job well". Does that surprise you?
Slashdot Mirror
Speaking of cats, and degrees, and penny-arcade...
He's not an MCSE yet, he failed tcp/ip!
He's not an MCSE yet, he failed tcp/ip!
There is a correlation between having chain saws and chainsaw accidents, between having telephones and wasting time gossiping, between doors and fingers slammed in doors. On a more personal note, also between posting on /. and not getting any work done.
What is so sensational about a tool that can be used both positively and negatively.
All that can be true when you tell the truth too. For instance, imagine your wife asking "Are you cheating on me?"
You're starting with the assumption that the truth can't hurt, and that assumption seems quite obviously false.
No, he's not starting with that assumption.
He was saying:
1. If is is given that you are going to tell the truth.
2. You can easily recite the truth without the contmeplation that *must* go into making something up that is still coherent.
You are confusing the difference between deciding whether to tell the truth or to lie, and actually concocting the lie itself. However, I don't think that it would be completely unreasonable to consider that an aspect of lying, albeit a prelimenary one. If one were to claim that it was not part of lying, that would then imply that telling the truth was not a default action.
Look at it this way though (listed from least throught to most thought):
Don't consider lying, and of course, tell the truth.
Consider lying, but then tell the truth.
Consider lying, and then lie.
That would possibly break down if one were to lie reflexivly, with no thought to creating the lie.
forgot to link it
Specific incident - DNA evidence overturned a prior convition that was based on eyewitness testimony
prosecutors throughout the country now worry about juries that refuse to accept eyewitness accounts
n es ses-reliability.shtml
This is not neccesarily a bad thing.
Eyewitnesses are exremely untrustworthy.
I remember this story that I heard in a psych class (prof claims it's true):
Vicky the victim is sitting at home and watching TV, Unammed Man breaks in and assaults her. She tells the cops she knows exactly what the guy looks like, describes him to a 'T' and then proceeds to immediately pick him out of a lineup, no hesitation, she's that sure.
There's only one problem, the guy has an alibi, a pretty good one at that, he was being interviewed on the live news when the break-in happened.
http://www.instant-essays.com/psychology/eyewit
Having juries put more weight on physical evidence, and less on testimony of an eyewitness would be a boon to the wrongly-accused-community of the US
From an artist's perspective and from someone who is (or seems very much to be) outside of the linux love-fest, what do you think of the various free tools(both in current usablility and/or distance from usability) for doing art, or arting? ie. the GIMP, Sodipodi, Kontour, Xfig, Inkscape
fire.
melting stuff never goes out of style
the USA must ... declare war on the abstract concept Science.
I beleive that you are not aware of a certain faction that is currenly in control of the white house.
i.e. global warming isn't real, mercury is the groundwater is good for you.
By "window" he means tab.
I took sandpaper and scraped it all over several media, including VHS, DVD, CD, Betamax and Vinyl.
The VHS and Betamax performed much better than the others, particularly of note was the DVD, and CD. They failed miserably.
one has to wonder whether airing such a controvercial movie on the eve of an election helps or hurts the political process by influencing the vote with last-minute emotions rather than thoroughly contemplation."
As opposed to the recent speeches at the RNC?
Zell Miller, who told lots of "Truths" (Propaganda that purports to be unbiased),
or the Terminator, who made that comment about girly men, now there is a thoughtful issue.
Personally, I would rather watch something where the bias has been admitted and is known.
If liberals have a heightened sense of fear, then why do all of the censervatives seem to think that America needs to attack any country that has muslims in it before the muslims start a Jihad/Holy war/WW3?
There is this right wing guy at work that never stops saying 'Life is like a dark alley'.
Everything that the government is doing points to a (wolfovitz doctrine themed) neo-conservative doctrine of 'hit them before they have the chance to think about pondering whether they might like to begin to have the capability to hit us'. And the liberals are the scared ones?
that's why there isn't a 1 before the .
If you want to wait until there is, then it will be ready for automagic operations. If you want firefox now, well then, deal.
It seems that all I hear about obstacles to Linux challenging MS for the desktop revolve around Linux being cryptic and too hard to use. Pardon my saying so, but does anyone else see a relation to not having everything run graphically and beautifully (read memory consuming)? If not then I am way off base, but as I see it, for all of your eye candy to work with the average user, you need to have everything available graphically, and there is only so much that you can drop into swap before things get clunky.
Some may say that making the desktop leaner would alleviate this memory footprint, but at what cost? Would it make things harder for a new user?
You can't have it both ways. If you don't like the way that KDE, Gnome or whatever are going, don't use them. That is the wonder of OS. However, major distros are going to attempt to appeal to the new-to-linux crowd.
Personally I find that galeon and evolution use so much more memory than my WM that the whole argument is academic; I need more memory than that anyway.
Besides, hardware is going to be free in the future anyway so who cares right?
I have to know what I am doing before I start. If I want to quickly highlight somehting and then move it into another app I use middle click, but if I plan to replace exising text then I copy/paste. I have yet to find an application that I use regularly that does not support a paste that does not involve the middle button.
The issue here is keeping your 'clipboards' straight in your mind. Remember what is in you middle button clipboard, yout Ctl+c clipboard, and what is in your Ctrl+k killring.
If I ever do select to paste, and then realize that I am planning on replacing text, I put the cursor at the beginning of the text to replace middle click and then Ctrl+k to eradicate the old text. Because the cursor moves to the end of the new text but is still before the old text I have my new text and no old text.
Granted, this is a little more complicted than the ms Cc Cv paradigm. But the linux setup allows more flexibility and power. If more complicated and more powerful does not describe Linux perfectly then I must be using a different OS than you.
My issues revolve around hitting ctrl-a ctrl-k in abiword or OO and trying to turn my entire document into a link.
And for those of us that enjoy clicking...
>This depends on the web being up all the time. (which it mostly, but not always is)
RTFA, or RTFC.
Get through ten comments and you will find some other idiot who also seems to think that IBM hadn't considered the nature of web access before you.
The suite works off-line.
Yeah, participating in slashdot almost guarentees dumbness... Wait, that's not a word.
dumbility.
dumbiptude.
not smartness.
>It said in the article that it could be accessed via Linux, so I don't see it requiring IE.
What about IE on linux? Huh?
Don't sound so smart now do ya?
>My gf is $39.40 a month
Hey! This is cheaper than my cable modem, and probably much more entertaining. Where do I sign up?
There are many more hidden costs that aren't represented in the subscription price.
The article mentions a different fuller version of the story.
If anyone knows where to find it; a link would be appreciated. I would really like to read that version.
>If you take your MBA and start your own company. If you hire the best coders in the world who are guaranteed to produce the most efficient code does this help you produce a successful product?
I agree that most of the commercial software out there does not need that sort of level of quality, but it depends on what my company makes. If I am producing shitty software that will run on an XP recommended system; who gives a crap? The importance of speed, size and efficiency (not to mention the lack of memory leaks) doesn't matter much. The important thing is features that will draw in buyers, especially for home systems.
BUT
If I'm doing some work for someone who is competing for the X-prize, or a new generation of the mars rover, or one of those cool video surgery systems. Then yes the most efficient code does help me to produce a successful product. In fact, there are some cases where it is necessary to production of a successful product.
In addition to that, if your coders pay no attantion to what they are doing and produce a product that bogs down the whole machine, you may be the first to market with a shitty product that gets blown out of the water two months later by someone who knows what they are doing (unless you have incredible market presence already(read are ms) in which case, you can take your time anyway).
I agree with you that the next generation in weatherbug software certianly does not need mission critical efficiency. My point is that there are other things that do, and you have no way of making that differentiation unless you understand it.
Tying this back in to CS majors, the lesson here is:
If you don't mind doing a job that you can take no pride in that may evaporate to India in a few years, then you don't need to understand that mathematics behind your code.
If however, you would like to work on something exiting and revolutionary that will be allowing you to develop your skills and push the bleeding edge of computing (where you need every cycle that you can get). Well, you better pay attention in those math classes.
Your post displays an interesting point. Using an advanced data structure versus two nested loops is an obvious choice. Or is it?
I did not say that the choice was obvious. I said:
"[W]hy would I possibly have to write this with an advanced data structure" is a stupid question.
I was applying this thought to the number of times that I had heard this in regard to a homework assignment, not if you ever had to write a towers of hanoi program in the real world. (I know, it's recursion, not ADS)
The question is stupid when you are learning how to write your programs. To claim that the question is not stupid would be the equivalent of saying that nested loops were the right tool for every job. In order to learn when to use and not use nested loops, you need to know the options and to understand them.
> Is it good to know advanced data structures? Of course. But more important is knowing when to use them and when not to use them.
Quite right. I agree completely. I was not saying that knowing how to write them was more important than knowing when to write them. But you can't know when to write them without knowing how to write them.
>CS majors have a hard time realizing that 9 times out of 10 time to market is more critical than computational costs.
I'm glad that they are the ones writing code for life critical systems. I'll have an MBA in addition to my CS in three weeks, and I can tell you: Ther are no classes about depending on programmers for advice concerning time to market, that's not thier job.
As a side note, CS people have a hard time being told by a manager "Do your job fast and produce a substandard product so I can do my job well". Does that surprise you?