Whether with programming languages or with studies it's the same: Garbage In, Garbage Out.
Select mobile, and you'll find Objective-C listed 16th, 6 places after MATLAB, and two places after Visual Basic. Which is clearly nonsense.
We already have tried and tested (back to 1989!) rankings for this. http://www.tiobe.com/index.php...
And Objective-C is currently number three across the board, never mind just mobile.
The filters are meaningless because they just hide the languages that are not classed as being used in that space, they don't actually measure usage in that space. When you hide all but mobile they're still ranking the languages by overall use, not use in the mobile space. So C# is at 4th despite it having almost no use in the mobile space.
It's not entirely clear that VR is going to displace PC gaming to that significant of a degree.
As a fairly avid gamer, most games I play are not in the first person perspective and I don't want them to be. I don't like FPS, and that's a huge portion of all first-person games... and VR almost implies a first person perspective.
Only if you've got no imagination. What this iteration of VR is bringing is head tracking and that allows massive virtual screens. I think Rift and similar products are going to break into non-gaming market as cost effective way of getting giant flat displays.
Because it's approximately true. Nominal resolution of the human eye is 1 arc-minute (1/60 of a degree), therefore a 1920 pixel wide display will subtend 32 degrees horizontally at the resolution limit. At 9 feet (108 inches), a 62 inch wide screen will subtend 32 degrees horizontally. Since screen sizes are measured on the diagonal, that equates to a 71 inch diagonal.
If that resolution is correct then you shouldn't be able to tell the difference between a 150dpi display and a 300dpi display at 2 feet but I certainly can. I'm not sure the 0.3-0.4 arc-minute figure I quoted in my other reply is really typical but I think most people's vision is better than 1 arc-minute.
Nominal resolution of the human eye is 1 arc-minute (1/60 of a degree)
That is too low. See, e.g. this, which states that the resolvable pixel size is about 0.3-0.4 arc-minutes. Using 0.4 means that at 9 feet any 16:9 1080p screen larger than 28" has resolvable pixels. A 4k screen could be as large as 55" before the pixels are resolvable.
I don't know why Jeffrey Gundlach is, but see no a priori reason to assume he *isn't* as smart, or smarter, than Elon Musk.
Well for a start he's a bond manager. The great minds of our world create, discover, invent. They don't manage bonds. The fact that he is not seeking out the sorts of intellectual challenges that Musk is, IMHO, evidence that he's not as smart as Musk. Regardless of the business success of Musk's companies, they've managed to solve engineering problems that no one else seems to have done. But, of course, that's irrelevant because he may well have more knowledge/experience/wisdom in the area he's giving advice. I think he could well be right in saying that the battery tech is the real point of difference for Tesla and that they should focus on that exclusively. But I suspect that Musk feels that if he doesn't prove there is a market then other car manufacturers will not take it seriously.
The post I replied to claimed you couldn't write *any* software for iOS without a dev subscription. That's false. Of course there are limitations with HTML5, just as there are limitations with any platform. I contend that the limitations are unlikely to be an issue for 95% of people who want to develop something for their phone/tablet but won't pay $100 per year to do it.
To be fair though HTML5 apps, and I run a few of them (Google's gmail app for the ipad for example) aren't anywhere near as smooth as native apps.
True, but for software you're writing for yourself that's probably not a big problem. The poster I replied to claimed you couldn't write and run software on your iOS device without paying the developer subscription. That's simply false, I've done it myself.
You can't write personal software for your iOS device without paying a $100/year subscription. (Well, you can write it, but you can't run it) I'm sorry, I don't want to have to pay a subscription to write software for my own device.
You can write anything you like in HTML5 and run it. In fact many "real" apps are just wrappers for a webkit widget running an HTML5 application.
But it's not a general purpose computer. The small screen, no keyboard and no external ports make it useless for doing any real work. Except for niche applications, it's strictly a content consumption device.
You try to make that sound trivial, but content consumption is what 90% of people use computers for 90% of the time outside of their jobs.
The Wikipedia article doesn't actually support the claim that no one else could make Coke though. A competitor could by from the Stepan Company just as Coca-cola does. If Coca-Cola don't have an alternative source then they wouldn't even be able to apply pressure to stop Stepan from selling to a competitor.
The USPS doesn't pay taxes. That means that we are paying their taxes.
Do postal service employees work for free? No. They pay taxes on the income that USPS pays them. Even if USPS doesn't generate a profit (and therefore doesn't pay an tax on its profit), it's still generating economic activity which is taxed. No different to any other company that is not making a profit.
The whole point behind Literate Programming is that you can't read non-literate code as literature, and Knuth believes being able to read code as literature makes it easier to understand. If you could read any sort of code as literature then why would we need literate programming? So given that virtual all code in existence is non-literate it's pretty obvious that trying to promote code reading as literature reading is not going to work that well. The point of this article is that the author tried it both ways (code reading groups reading code as literature and treating it as an investigation) and found the investigative approach worked better. He's not expressing an opinion or proposing a hypothesis, he's simply reporting what worked and what did not.
to successfully create a code reading culture you must acknowledge that in practice examining most code is not at all like reading literature and instead needs to be approached more like a scientific investigation
OK, so that's an interesting hypothesis, what evidence do you have to support your hypothesis? Doesn't it make more sense that if you want people to read your code, you should make it easy to read (that is, make it literate)?
Evidence? Did you RTFA? I've just given you a one line synopsis, if you want evidence you'll find it there.
Knuth actually provided an anecdote that reinforces this point so I very much doubt he disagrees with it.
I read Knuth's Literate Programming, and I would say I accurately portrayed his viewpoint. Would you like to read the book and tell me how you think I misunderstood it? To restate, Knuth doesn't think all code is literature, he thinks code can be literature, and he taught how to get there.
We're not talking about Knuth's book. We're talking about the article, which you apparently didn't bother to read. In it Knuth provides an anecdote that supports the author's contention. Please, go and RTFA.
Knuth (and many others) think code should be more like literature, but to successfully create a code reading culture you must acknowledge that in practice examining most code is not at all like reading literature and instead needs to be approached more like a scientific investigation. Knuth actually provided an anecdote that reinforces this point so I very much doubt he disagrees with it.
The first thing the government's lawyers would try to do is to get as much damning evidence as possible defined as state secrets. That prevents the evidence from being introduced in court or used as the basis for a decision or finding. They've done this before, see this story, for example. For a breakdown of the various types of secrets and how they are handled in a court see this piece which is part of a series on Ibrahim vs DHS, the first challenge on a "no-fly" order to make trial.
I disagree. Technically the first prostitute wasn't a prostitute until she'd done the deed, and that didn't happen until she'd marketed her wares. Marketing is the oldest profession, prostitution a very close second.;-)
Only if he or she advertised first. But if he or she was solicited, which seems more likely, then prostitution was the oldest.
Name one standard graphics system used by more than one operating system... If you want cross OS compatibility and network transparency, X11 is still the only game in town.
Everyone uses one everyday. I've got four implementations by different vendors on the system I'm using right now. There are implementations for Linux, OS X, Windows, and pretty much everything else. Have you heard of HTML? It's the network transparent UI platform that the world has settled on.
See and I've tried them. I really have, and even after two or three months, I had to go back because my living room felt like a damn jail cell or dentist office. I tried them again recently too and I still hate them. Why can't they produce them with more normal colour temperatures?
They do. From the first link in the post you replied to: "AVAILABLE IN WARM WHITE (3000K) or DAYLIGHT(5500K)".
I have always had an honest question about the data on global warming that no one can seem to answer so I will try here...
It's such as simple question that I can't believe that "no one can seem to answer". More likely you just don't accept their answer for some reason. Anyway Google "climate proxies" and you'll have your answer.
Slashdot Mirror
Whether with programming languages or with studies it's the same: Garbage In, Garbage Out.
Select mobile, and you'll find Objective-C listed 16th, 6 places after MATLAB, and two places after Visual Basic. Which is clearly nonsense.
We already have tried and tested (back to 1989!) rankings for this. http://www.tiobe.com/index.php... And Objective-C is currently number three across the board, never mind just mobile.
The filters are meaningless because they just hide the languages that are not classed as being used in that space, they don't actually measure usage in that space. When you hide all but mobile they're still ranking the languages by overall use, not use in the mobile space. So C# is at 4th despite it having almost no use in the mobile space.
And 3D movies have been around since the 70's using of anaglyph 3D glasses. The implementation matters!
You understand that a plane can exist in a 3D space, right?
It's not entirely clear that VR is going to displace PC gaming to that significant of a degree.
As a fairly avid gamer, most games I play are not in the first person perspective and I don't want them to be. I don't like FPS, and that's a huge portion of all first-person games... and VR almost implies a first person perspective.
Only if you've got no imagination. What this iteration of VR is bringing is head tracking and that allows massive virtual screens. I think Rift and similar products are going to break into non-gaming market as cost effective way of getting giant flat displays.
Because it's approximately true. Nominal resolution of the human eye is 1 arc-minute (1/60 of a degree), therefore a 1920 pixel wide display will subtend 32 degrees horizontally at the resolution limit. At 9 feet (108 inches), a 62 inch wide screen will subtend 32 degrees horizontally. Since screen sizes are measured on the diagonal, that equates to a 71 inch diagonal.
If that resolution is correct then you shouldn't be able to tell the difference between a 150dpi display and a 300dpi display at 2 feet but I certainly can. I'm not sure the 0.3-0.4 arc-minute figure I quoted in my other reply is really typical but I think most people's vision is better than 1 arc-minute.
Nominal resolution of the human eye is 1 arc-minute (1/60 of a degree)
That is too low. See, e.g. this, which states that the resolvable pixel size is about 0.3-0.4 arc-minutes. Using 0.4 means that at 9 feet any 16:9 1080p screen larger than 28" has resolvable pixels. A 4k screen could be as large as 55" before the pixels are resolvable.
I don't know why Jeffrey Gundlach is, but see no a priori reason to assume he *isn't* as smart, or smarter, than Elon Musk.
Well for a start he's a bond manager. The great minds of our world create, discover, invent. They don't manage bonds. The fact that he is not seeking out the sorts of intellectual challenges that Musk is, IMHO, evidence that he's not as smart as Musk. Regardless of the business success of Musk's companies, they've managed to solve engineering problems that no one else seems to have done. But, of course, that's irrelevant because he may well have more knowledge/experience/wisdom in the area he's giving advice. I think he could well be right in saying that the battery tech is the real point of difference for Tesla and that they should focus on that exclusively. But I suspect that Musk feels that if he doesn't prove there is a market then other car manufacturers will not take it seriously.
Hm. Failed to enable. Is this a new feature?
I'm pretty sure it's been there since iMessage was first released.
You'd have a point if they were developing for a phone/tablet. But they weren't, so how does that example counter my position?
The post I replied to claimed you couldn't write *any* software for iOS without a dev subscription. That's false. Of course there are limitations with HTML5, just as there are limitations with any platform. I contend that the limitations are unlikely to be an issue for 95% of people who want to develop something for their phone/tablet but won't pay $100 per year to do it.
To be fair though HTML5 apps, and I run a few of them (Google's gmail app for the ipad for example) aren't anywhere near as smooth as native apps.
True, but for software you're writing for yourself that's probably not a big problem. The poster I replied to claimed you couldn't write and run software on your iOS device without paying the developer subscription. That's simply false, I've done it myself.
You can't write personal software for your iOS device without paying a $100/year subscription. (Well, you can write it, but you can't run it) I'm sorry, I don't want to have to pay a subscription to write software for my own device.
You can write anything you like in HTML5 and run it. In fact many "real" apps are just wrappers for a webkit widget running an HTML5 application.
But it's not a general purpose computer. The small screen, no keyboard and no external ports make it useless for doing any real work. Except for niche applications, it's strictly a content consumption device.
You try to make that sound trivial, but content consumption is what 90% of people use computers for 90% of the time outside of their jobs.
I highly doubt this.
Would have thought it common knowledge at this point. But here have some Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca-Cola#Coca_.E2.80.93_cocaine
The Wikipedia article doesn't actually support the claim that no one else could make Coke though. A competitor could by from the Stepan Company just as Coca-cola does. If Coca-Cola don't have an alternative source then they wouldn't even be able to apply pressure to stop Stepan from selling to a competitor.
The USPS doesn't pay taxes. That means that we are paying their taxes.
Do postal service employees work for free? No. They pay taxes on the income that USPS pays them. Even if USPS doesn't generate a profit (and therefore doesn't pay an tax on its profit), it's still generating economic activity which is taxed. No different to any other company that is not making a profit.
It's clearly satire. You're wrong on this.
We're talking about Knuth's opinion.
The whole point behind Literate Programming is that you can't read non-literate code as literature, and Knuth believes being able to read code as literature makes it easier to understand. If you could read any sort of code as literature then why would we need literate programming? So given that virtual all code in existence is non-literate it's pretty obvious that trying to promote code reading as literature reading is not going to work that well. The point of this article is that the author tried it both ways (code reading groups reading code as literature and treating it as an investigation) and found the investigative approach worked better. He's not expressing an opinion or proposing a hypothesis, he's simply reporting what worked and what did not.
to successfully create a code reading culture you must acknowledge that in practice examining most code is not at all like reading literature and instead needs to be approached more like a scientific investigation
OK, so that's an interesting hypothesis, what evidence do you have to support your hypothesis? Doesn't it make more sense that if you want people to read your code, you should make it easy to read (that is, make it literate)?
Evidence? Did you RTFA? I've just given you a one line synopsis, if you want evidence you'll find it there.
Knuth actually provided an anecdote that reinforces this point so I very much doubt he disagrees with it.
I read Knuth's Literate Programming, and I would say I accurately portrayed his viewpoint. Would you like to read the book and tell me how you think I misunderstood it? To restate, Knuth doesn't think all code is literature, he thinks code can be literature, and he taught how to get there.
We're not talking about Knuth's book. We're talking about the article, which you apparently didn't bother to read. In it Knuth provides an anecdote that supports the author's contention. Please, go and RTFA.
Knuth disagrees...
Knuth (and many others) think code should be more like literature, but to successfully create a code reading culture you must acknowledge that in practice examining most code is not at all like reading literature and instead needs to be approached more like a scientific investigation. Knuth actually provided an anecdote that reinforces this point so I very much doubt he disagrees with it.
The first thing the government's lawyers would try to do is to get as much damning evidence as possible defined as state secrets. That prevents the evidence from being introduced in court or used as the basis for a decision or finding. They've done this before, see this story, for example. For a breakdown of the various types of secrets and how they are handled in a court see this piece which is part of a series on Ibrahim vs DHS, the first challenge on a "no-fly" order to make trial.
I disagree. Technically the first prostitute wasn't a prostitute until she'd done the deed, and that didn't happen until she'd marketed her wares. Marketing is the oldest profession, prostitution a very close second. ;-)
Only if he or she advertised first. But if he or she was solicited, which seems more likely, then prostitution was the oldest.
Name one standard graphics system used by more than one operating system ... If you want cross OS compatibility and network transparency, X11 is still the only game in town.
Everyone uses one everyday. I've got four implementations by different vendors on the system I'm using right now. There are implementations for Linux, OS X, Windows, and pretty much everything else. Have you heard of HTML? It's the network transparent UI platform that the world has settled on.
See and I've tried them. I really have, and even after two or three months, I had to go back because my living room felt like a damn jail cell or dentist office. I tried them again recently too and I still hate them. Why can't they produce them with more normal colour temperatures?
They do. From the first link in the post you replied to: "AVAILABLE IN WARM WHITE (3000K) or DAYLIGHT(5500K)".
I have always had an honest question about the data on global warming that no one can seem to answer so I will try here...
It's such as simple question that I can't believe that "no one can seem to answer". More likely you just don't accept their answer for some reason. Anyway Google "climate proxies" and you'll have your answer.
Could you remind me again, won't this be the 15th year since global warming stopped?
There IS a problem with global warming... it stopped in 1998
No, no, no.