If your code isn't properly split into many small, specific tasks, then you're doing something wrong.
If you make statements like this, you obviously don't have a clue about programming anything more than little helper utilities.
All code is split into small, specific tasks. They're call functions.
So did you mean "all code" or "all code that is written in a proper and reasonable manner"? To put it another way, are you tryting to assert that it would be impossible for a team to just drop *everything* into one function?
If you are not trying to assert that, then you really mean that all code that is written well is split into small, specific tasks. So one could say that if code were not split into functions, then it had not been written well .
What then if one was not doing that? Would that person be "doing something wrong"? If so, then: If your code isn't properly split into many small, specific tasks, then you're doing something wrong.
> 2: Using a large solenoid to magnetically rip > apart an aluminum can (can is placed in the > center of the circle of wires and large AC is > momentarily applied)
I was under the impression that aluminum was non-magnetic.
I have been wondering about this quite a bit lately (I just watched the first season of OZ), what kind of internet access do you have in prison? Is it different for you because of why you are there? (Do other prisoners have more access)
And if so what kind of latentcy do you get there (Would playing over there up my fraggs)?
That's all nice and good, but Quantum encryption will not be needed until someone finds a way to factor quickly (thus rendering public key encryption useless). In case no one has noticed, that ain't gonna happen too soon. Quantum encryption will arrive with quantum computers, quantum computers will also make every form of encryption useless (besides quantum encryption).
SO
as soon as quantum computing shows up:
1. RSA, Lucifer, Raindoll are all rendered useless.
2. A better(and THEORETICALLY unbreakable) way to encrypt also is possible due to quantum computing.
Personally (as a Junior CS student), I think that one of the hardest concepts to wrap your head around is recursion. I have more than a few friends that avoid it like the plauge. Maybe the second biggest problem for intro CS students would be syntax. I would advocate the use of a scripting language (lisp/VB/scheme) (PL Scheme or Dr. Scheme) not only do the schemes have a command line interpreter, but there are no tricky missing semicolons. You can also still teach switch/if/while structures. The first language I had was QBASIC, the next VBASIC. The one good thing about VB is that you get pretty results as soon as possible, and get to have buttons and pretty widgets. I am glad that I learned simple data structures in VB before I got to C++, because eveyone in the class was still struggling with syntax, when you really want to teach logic. I'm not going to repeat the reasonong behind not starting with ASM, because I must've read 50 of them by now, but suffice it to say that intro classes have NO business around anyhting remotely like ASM. Any move away from specifics and into concepts should be a welcome one.
"My hesitation is that dolphins are primarily acoustic animals while humans are primarily visual animals. In humans,
the most-used sense is vision; we use it to process data."
I remember reading something about Dolphins that they couldn't distinguish images on a TV, and that was part of the problems that came with working with them.
I personally, am sceptical about the whole thing. Keeping me from burning mp3's onto a cd? because all I'd need to do is write from winamp to.wav then re rip.
I realize that from a monetary point of view it makes sense. But I take pride in the code that I write (or try to), and to say that doesn't matter, just doesn't set well with me.
This is not a silly question, but the answer is more obvious if looked at first from the "art" side. Before you can classify art, you have to define it. What is art? This question has been asked innumerable times using different "artforms". Abstract art is a good example. Abstract art is now accepted as normal, but it once was someone's drop cloth. "Art" cannot be defined or bounded. Art is sometimes a personal thing, but does not have to be. The point is: art is anything that anyone wants it to be. Including Picasso, Beethoven, and code.
I don't know if anyone out there has heard of a company called Identix, but they make the most secure figerprint scanners today. They can be used in place of a password, or in place of a digital sig. Using these devices, one can prove that Alice was there and that she put her thumb on the little black thingie when she was told to. This is the most that it is possible to prove with a "real" signature. You can prove that Alice was there, and that she had the means to read whatever she signed, but, you cannot prove that she understands it short of her writing an essay on the implications of it.
Anyway, assuming that you are trusting the cryptography after the computer, this type of fingerprint scanning ensures the link in between the signer and the computer.
And no, if you cut someone's hand off it will not work (with identix devices), and if you put saran wrap on it right after alice pushed it, that won't work either.
I just want these things for my door. I hate keys.
You are talking about a country full of people who are afraid that the government will take away their guns. How likely do you think it is that they will let anyone put tracking chips in their children. Not to mention the millions of people who would be scared to death to have any type of electronics in them.
How many religions do you think would have some sort of prohibition on combining "man and machine" ? How well do you think this would go over in the bible belt?
In the US of A? I doubt it.
You can be concerned about privacy and hackers and whatnot, but do you really think that all of the bleeding hearts out there would let you implant one into an unwilling human being? It's hard enough to get a death sentence for repeat rapists and murderers. Besides you are talking about America, the place where people are afraid that the government is going to take away their guns, how do you think that they would take to personal tracking devices?
Slashdot Mirror
Mod parent down
-1 troll
(no one could confuse OSX, a BSD derivative, with linux)
RTFP
Date Filed: December 20, 2002
I really like your sig. So much so that I bought the t-shirt that you took it from.
Are you so unoriginal that you need to get your sigs from t-shirts ?
If your code isn't properly split into many small, specific tasks, then you're doing something wrong.
If you make statements like this, you obviously don't have a clue about programming anything more than little helper utilities.
All code is split into small, specific tasks. They're call functions.
So did you mean "all code" or "all code that is written in a proper and reasonable manner"? To put it another way, are you tryting to assert that it would be impossible for a team to just drop *everything* into one function?
If you are not trying to assert that, then you really mean that all code that is written well is split into small, specific tasks. So one could say that if code were not split into functions, then it had not been written well .
What then if one was not doing that? Would that person be "doing something wrong"? If so, then: If your code isn't properly split into many small, specific tasks, then you're doing something wrong.
DC current applied backwards to a capacator makes it explode.
Although that's not really surprinsing to most people, as most people have no idea what a capacator is.
> 2: Using a large solenoid to magnetically rip
> apart an aluminum can (can is placed in the
> center of the circle of wires and large AC is
> momentarily applied)
I was under the impression that aluminum was non-magnetic.
How does this work?
This is exactly how setbelts worked when they were first introduced.
I dunno if anyone else reads this, but I do.
about a page up from here
I laughed so hard I almost pissed myself. penny-arcade
I have been wondering about this quite a bit lately (I just watched the first season of OZ), what kind of internet access do you have in prison? Is it different for you because of why you are there? (Do other prisoners have more access)
And if so what kind of latentcy do you get there (Would playing over there up my fraggs)?
What about Farscape? I love that show
That's all nice and good, but Quantum encryption will not be needed until someone finds a way to factor quickly (thus rendering public key encryption useless). In case no one has noticed, that ain't gonna happen too soon. Quantum encryption will arrive with quantum computers, quantum computers will also make every form of encryption useless (besides quantum encryption).
SO
as soon as quantum computing shows up:
1. RSA, Lucifer, Raindoll are all rendered useless.
2. A better(and THEORETICALLY unbreakable) way to encrypt also is possible due to quantum computing.
Personally (as a Junior CS student), I think that one of the hardest concepts to wrap your head around is recursion. I have more than a few friends that avoid it like the plauge. Maybe the second biggest problem for intro CS students would be syntax. I would advocate the use of a scripting language (lisp/VB/scheme) (PL Scheme or Dr. Scheme) not only do the schemes have a command line interpreter, but there are no tricky missing semicolons. You can also still teach switch/if/while structures. The first language I had was QBASIC, the next VBASIC. The one good thing about VB is that you get pretty results as soon as possible, and get to have buttons and pretty widgets. I am glad that I learned simple data structures in VB before I got to C++, because eveyone in the class was still struggling with syntax, when you really want to teach logic. I'm not going to repeat the reasonong behind not starting with ASM, because I must've read 50 of them by now, but suffice it to say that intro classes have NO business around anyhting remotely like ASM. Any move away from specifics and into concepts should be a welcome one.
Intro classes are about ideas, not languages.
"My hesitation is that dolphins are primarily acoustic animals while humans are primarily visual animals. In humans, the most-used sense is vision; we use it to process data."
I remember reading something about Dolphins that they couldn't distinguish images on a TV, and that was part of the problems that came with working with them.
I personally, am sceptical about the whole thing. Keeping me from burning mp3's onto a cd? because all I'd need to do is write from winamp to .wav then re rip.
I realize that from a monetary point of view it makes sense. But I take pride in the code that I write (or try to), and to say that doesn't matter, just doesn't set well with me.
C and C++ optimize for machine efficiency at the expense of increased implementation and (especially) debugging time
While the sentiment is probably correct, there is something about sacrificing the quality of a program because your(the coder's) time is so important.
This is not a silly question, but the answer is more obvious if looked at first from the "art" side. Before you can classify art, you have to define it. What is art? This question has been asked innumerable times using different "artforms". Abstract art is a good example. Abstract art is now accepted as normal, but it once was someone's drop cloth. "Art" cannot be defined or bounded. Art is sometimes a personal thing, but does not have to be. The point is: art is anything that anyone wants it to be. Including Picasso, Beethoven, and code.
That's different, that type is a "real" signature, just electronically recorded.
I don't know if anyone out there has heard of a company called Identix, but they make the most secure figerprint scanners today. They can be used in place of a password, or in place of a digital sig. Using these devices, one can prove that Alice was there and that she put her thumb on the little black thingie when she was told to. This is the most that it is possible to prove with a "real" signature. You can prove that Alice was there, and that she had the means to read whatever she signed, but, you cannot prove that she understands it short of her writing an essay on the implications of it.
Anyway, assuming that you are trusting the cryptography after the computer, this type of fingerprint scanning ensures the link in between the signer and the computer.
And no, if you cut someone's hand off it will not work (with identix devices), and if you put saran wrap on it right after alice pushed it, that won't work either.
I just want these things for my door. I hate keys.
Enroll in an expensive four year university
What are they going to do about objects that are bigger than 10 centimeters? Just not hit any?
You are talking about a country full of people who are afraid that the government will take away their guns. How likely do you think it is that they will let anyone put tracking chips in their children. Not to mention the millions of people who would be scared to death to have any type of electronics in them.
How many religions do you think would have some sort of prohibition on combining "man and machine" ? How well do you think this would go over in the bible belt?
In the US of A? I doubt it.
You can be concerned about privacy and hackers and whatnot, but do you really think that all of the bleeding hearts out there would let you implant one into an unwilling human being? It's hard enough to get a death sentence for repeat rapists and murderers. Besides you are talking about America, the place where people are afraid that the government is going to take away their guns, how do you think that they would take to personal tracking devices?