Re:Kiss and say goodbye to Java language!!
on
PHP 5 Beta 1
·
· Score: 1
Actually, I think you mean sarcasm, but it is pretty ironic that less people know the difference now that/. had an article on it. I'm glad I don't read any of the articles!
Re:Kiss and say goodbye to Java language!!
on
PHP 5 Beta 1
·
· Score: 1, Funny
You are so right!
I don't know why I ever thought that persistant state across a cluster of machines was a good idea. Why didn't I just send queries to the database every single page load?
MVC is overrated. Struts and Webwork are toys so that developers don't have to do mindless work like design a web page. Taglibs are no match for cut'n'paste of PHP code.
JDBC's gaurantee of levels of ANSI SQL compliance is stupid, who would want to use a database other than MySQL? Hibernate and JDO are silly; why would anyone want to map objects directly to rows in a database.
JavaMail API is no match for PHP's mail sending and recieving. Who would want to support both IMAP and POP3 without writing their own code to handle each?
I can't believe I've been using JSP and Servlets so long that I thought they were fast. No one ever uses many function calls to warrant actually including them in wholistic benchmarks. I know I've never developed anything more complicated than select * or hello world. I'm glad most of these benchmarks use BlackDown as their JRE, because we know a good JIT isn't worth the effort. Though I don't use anything complicated in my scripts, the speed of floating-point math that isn't IEEE compliant is so important, I would have a special section for it in my benchmark.
I can see all those enterprise level companies that link their inventory, customer relation, warrenty information, and tech support altogether crying because they should have used Personal HomePage for their corperate infrastructure.
Well, I'm going to go burn all my JSP books now that I can sleep better knowing they aren't useful. All those wonderful 404 links really clued me in to my idiocy. Thank you brave/.er for your help in making me to realize the errors of my ways.
According to dictionary.com, at least one possible definition of grammar includes semantics.
BTW, it is not ironic that I would be hit by a Grammar Nazi when argueing against them, or in a story that is pretty much about grammar, before someone bends the meaning of ironic yet more.
Irony, as I understand it, is the belief that an outcome is contradictory to that which would be considered the norm. I would consider it a norm that someone complaining about grammar would not know the difference between grammar and semantics. I think it is ironic though that the guy complaining about grammar is supported by the dictionary against a Grammar Nazi. I would have expected to have been wrong, in a grammatical arguement considering my hatred of grammar.
It is ironic that in a Slashdot story trying to define irony that you would get irony wrong. If you had said "This post is ironic" you would be both true and false because you can't possibly expect both outcomes simultaneously. This is actually a paradox though, but most people don't get paradoxes wrong.
Irony, though, only exists in the mind of the person understanding a statement or happening. To you, rain on your wedding day may be ironic because somehow, in your head, you may have thought that it couldn't rain on your wedding day.
You may now think that it's ironic that a definition of a word could be so fickle, but it's abstract and quantitative, like beauty. That is to say, some things are more ironic than others, some things are ironic to more people than others, and anything is probably ironic to at least one person.
So would people stop telling other people what is ironic and what is not? Probably not because most people insist on telling others what is beautiful or not (see Fox for examples). I think my sense of beauty, like my sense of irony, is also different from the norm too, because I tend to think that starving stuck-up people are beautiful neither externally nor internally.
Therefore; screw you fox for telling me that my sense of beauty is wrong, screw you alanis moriset for being so stupid that rain on your wedding day is actually ironic to you, and most of all screw you Grammar Nazis for wasting my time with your often wrong accusation of the improper use of the English language that is just a derivative of a derivative of Latin. Here's one for you language purists (Grammar Nazis and the French) why don't you still speak Latin? The hipocracy is too great for me to ever take a language purist seriously.
I think you have a skewed definition of slow. Maybe I should say:
1. Get a Pentium maching with 32M Ram. 2. Run hello world in Java. 3. Reboot into Linux and run HelloWorld.
It took longer to reboot, so Linux and C is Slower than Java?
I think what you mean is that Java takes too long to start, and I, and everyone in the whole community, agrees with you. However, if you say that a Java program is unusable for user interaction on a pentium, you're just trolling.
You're point is the focus of this release of Java, I would say. 30% cut back in start times. On 400Mhz machines, Java still starts command line programs pretty much instantly now. At least it is fast enough to interact with despite that you are loading a VM every time you run a program.
The Java community is actually outraged that SUN keeps pushing the shared VM technology further back. Imagine if your hello world program only needed to be loaded and interpretted. I think the overhead of creating a new process may exceed the overhead of Java. At that point, I think your arguement would be pointless. This is what we, the developers, are working for. I just hope you or others like you aren't so short sighted that you can't see that Java performance is that close at hand.
Java is really made for people that want to make large projects. If you have some 2-bit project that wouldn't benefit from all the safety checking, you should use C probably, but then again, would performance be an issue for a small task?
I thought the whole point of Java was that it made life easier on programmers, so how can you say that you can program faster in C++ unless you are ignoring memory management? What about using non-STL libraries? Will other developers still understand your code if you use wxWindows instead of GTK? Java makes programming easier both the first time, and when you have to come back and add functionality.
You may compare Perl to Java, but then you would loose the performance arguement, but win the easy to program arguement, but loose the easy to maintain arguement, and win the quick start arguement. Java's regular expression engine is significantly faster than Perls (as in levels of magnitude, not petty 10%'s).
Java is a good all around best choice for most programing tasks, unless you can understand LISP. It excels in daemon work, but never really gets used there. Consider that you will never have buffer overflows, you will usually not have to restart daemons, and Java has a framework for single threaded TCP/IP IO. You could also reduce memory footprint by having one VM load several TCP/IP server "modules".
Re:I find it ironic that...
on
Isn't It Ironic?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I can't believe those friggen Grammar Nazis have been escalated to front page news.
Before long people will throw logic to the wind as long as you cross your T's and dot your I's.
If you don't post in iambic pentameter with a definate rhyming scheme, you'll be ignored.
So, now all we need is moderation categories +1 beautiful, -1 spelling, -1 grammar, -1 invalid use of a colon, and -1 poor word choice.
Next month, from the grammar dept., we'll be discussing the spelling of the letter H. It's actually spelled aitch. Maybe I should have submitted it as a story?
The power of general idiocy is still greater than the Grammar Nazis because irregardless is now in most dictionaries despite the fight they tried to put up.
If you find this story interesting, I'm sure you will find the history of the word "ain't" (originally "an't" in the 1700's) much more interesting. To make a long story short, it was a word used by upper class as well as lower, but the "Usage Panel" decided one day that it was a sign of ignorance, so it was pretty much had it's status as a word revoked. Those very people use the improper conjugation with another contraction ending up with "aren't I". So, I would rather respond to people that say "aren't I" with "I don't know, but I are" just to point out their idiocy in not using the correct word "an't". Those that avoid the topic altogether say "am I not?". In any case, the phrase "Say it ain't so!" will always ensure that this word will never be lost.
I have better things to do than talk about grammar, so it's back to watching the grass grow for me.
You know, I'm usually the first man upset when people say "Java is slow" without evidence, but I think performance improvement is a valid question of any new product. It's even more of a question when the new release actually is about performance to a degree. So... I wonder who modded you flaimbait, and why.
On topic though, I've noticed a lot of performance enhancements. If you don't load a GUI, you're program will start pretty much instantly, and will only take about 5M of RAM for a small program. GUI's will take 6M more just because. I'm sure a lot of the 6M is external to the VM and/or frame buffers.
In any case, I'm happy that my programs keep getting faster without me having to touch them. Also, now they work on the Itanium2, I can put that in the marketing material. (All with no coding/work on my part.) Sometimes, you have to really appreciate the good sides of Java.
Well, the problem was going to be Microsoft shipping their technology for free, and no competition (IE, they were going to do the same thing they were doing to netscape). They are going to ship.Net runtimes, and then all the programers have one extra reason to program for.Net that they don't Java, which tilts the scales of fair competition toward MS. That's what this case was about.
The other cases in the past were about MS shipping broken versions of the JRE that actually caused Java more harm than good. SUN had an agreement with MS a long time ago to let them continue shipping theing JRE because MS clients were reliant on their JRE at the time (but that didn't change because MS didn't give them any incentive to change until.Net). Now that things have changed (.Net) it would follow that MS clients would no longer need the JRE MS ships.
When you combine these two arguements, the logical arguement is to A) prevent MS from shipping.Net with the OS (like they were going to do with IE), or B) force them to include competing products (maybe they should have to include perl and python as well?). Either way, it stems from MS's verticle integration in the marketplace giving them an unfair market advantage. If they can hook you on one product, you have to run every peice of the MS puzzle. Java threatens this domination by allowing third party developers to write programs that will run on hardware and operating systems that the developer couldn't have even imagined. This makes software completely unreliant on market fads, and the software improves with the OS, JRE, and hardware. Java doesn't care if you are using MySQL or MSSQL, it's all the same.
This scares MS a lot, which is why they wanted to mutilate it from the start. If they have control of the VM, they can always make it preform better on their OS and hardware. SUN hasn't taken advantage of Java like this (thus Java on Solaris is horrible compared to windows).
Basically, this ruling is saying that it is OK for MS to ship products with their operating systems without including 3rd party competing products. It's a complete reversal of the Netscape issue that lead to a government investigation and almost a break up of the MS company. What was wrong before the monopoly investigation (or before Bush took office, your choice) is now just fair trade.
I think in order to show a copyright breach, they may have to show that at least one person unlicensed to use a product downloaded the product from them. Then to determine how much damage this has done, they will have to get a tally the number of illegal transfers of a song occured, multiply that by the value of the song (1$ if it's on iTunes). The biggest cost may likely end up being court costs and legal fees, but I don't think a judge is going to be very keen on awarding reasonable legal fees greater than the cost of the suit altogether.
I really don't know what this is going to mean, probably nothing in the end except drawing attention to themselves. I hope they sue so many people that everyone has at least someone they know that ended up in court over it. This way their illegal trust under the gues of an "association" will start to crumble because of lack of people willing to buy their product.
They will never get rid of copyright infringement, but they may drive it underground like software piracy has been driven (mostly). The most probably outcome of this case is absolutely nothing (not even the cases they say they are going to file). If the cases get filed, they will give up after the 100, and start trying to strong arm the government into mass enforcement of a civil case, or give up on the whole idea. If they continued to press the issue, I think fans and artists would revolt if the companies actually comprising the RIAA didn't just give up their membership because that would be such a stupid idea. Everyone is guilty, and legal cases cause people stress, and generally just anger them. Those that don't get sued, and are reasonable, will feal sympathy for those that got caught, because they are just as guilty themselves.
If they push much more, they face the prospect of competition from other labels, or self-publishing artists where the artists don't like to see their fans hurt, and are already only getting 5 cents a song or so. The artists need to wisen up that they are getting screwed both ways. People aren't getting access to their music, and they aren't getting paid nearly what they ought to be.
As long as people know that artists are only getting 5 cents a song, they aren't going to feel too bad about the musicians they love only getting screwed out of a nickle if they don't buy the song; whereas, if they buy the song, 95% of the money goes to sue their buddy across the hall in their dorm, or pay someone's salary that help make the decision to sue his buddy across the hall.
Is breaking a copyright really even a criminal case? If it were criminal, then it wouldn't result in an award to a third party. It was my understanding that copyright cases had to be filed by the person who's rights were violated, then they are taken to court in a civil suit where they are sued.
Even if it is a criminal case, that would really only mean that local police are supposed to handle it, correct? Doesn't it really have to be a felony before the FBI are supposed to get involved?
My problem with this whole thing is that it is escalating the seriousness of copyright law so that the burden of prosecution is moved from the copyright holder to the federal government.
In any case, they won't be able to take you to any significant level of court for downloading a few songs, movies, and even software if they can't prosecute you for more than 50$ or so. So, since iTunes has songs for a 1$, you can get away with about 49 songs per copyright holder.
This is all assuming that a criminal case can't/won't be brought against you. Not that they will ever come after anyone for downloading songs unless you get made an example out of. Of course, that would make for very bad publicity. (More to the artists than the labels.)
---Multipart message--- ---Part 1--- So, you are trying to tell me that a government is spending money to keep a company afloat so what, that they don't have an unemployment problem?
Sounds to me like anyone with half a brain would rather let something good crop up from the ashes that might actually be productive for the country, not vise-versa.
Maybe I'm just not seeing this from the right perspective.
Can you explain why this is happening, how it is supposed to work, and what the benefit to the average South Korean is for this to continue?
Is it market saturation, and SK wants to keep the company afloat for long enough for another to fall?
Why the general tarrif?
There are more questions than answers, and I can only imagine it gets worse the more you dig.
This is friggen memory chips... before we can get legislation through to lift this tarriff, there will be more demand than the American market can handle probably in 6 months. If our economy wasn't tanking because Bush's poor economic plan, I'm sure the demand would already be there.
---Part 2; Content-Type: Rant/Troll--- Why not fix the root problem by hitting Bush in the head with a shovel until he learns the basic principals of economics. What am I saying, he can't learn. I know someone that saw him speak once. He quoted Bush: "I think we should teach more Latin in school so we can speak with our Latin American friends." My friend thought he was joking because no one could be that stupid and just started cracking up. One of the security officers nudged him and said, "He's serious."
Haha, I was going to post the same thing. I'm suprised many people even remember VMS versioning, but it was done pretty good I would say. Maybe listing all the versions with an ls was a bad idea, that should probably be a different command. Besides, I hate seeing file~ whenever an editor wants to save a backup copy.
I, for one, will be the first idiot to jump on the versioning train when it gets here in a pre-alpha form that is gauranteed to crash. It's such a useful concept, and implementing it at application level is just not as good in a lot of respects.
I actually had the fortune to work with someone that had ADD and Tourette syndrome. He drank Mt. Dew like he was addicted. When I worked with him, things happened instantly, and mostly flawlessly. He was excellent at coming up with neat algorithms that I ordinarily wouldn't come up with, and I just had the ability to design and implement the ideas almost as quick as he came up with them.
The moral of the story, I think, is that with a little variety, you can find combinations of people that have a lot of quirks, yet the job gets done quicker and better than a team of 8 and twice the time.
Everytime he tried cutting back on caffeine, he had problems focusing. He also had problems sleeping if he didn't have the proper medication and lighting. He had SAD. He took a lot of medication, and for him, as he described it, it was a matter of experimentation. The speed/caffeine (caffeine amplifies medication most of the time, and it specifically seems to help his ADD he said) combination is what he said worked best for him, but for some reason he was always being moved to different medications.
Altogether a great guy, and I think his quirks actually helped him in a lot of ways. The more diverse your team, the more different perspectives there are to weigh.
You're kind of tap dancing around the issue a bit, I think, but you know what the problem is. If someone gives value to something in a pretend world, they have problems seperating fantasy from the real. Laws shouldn't encourage mental health problems.
If you write a book, it may not have value, it depends on if it has purpose in the real world. If you write a book to sell because people want to read it to be entertained or learn something, then it has value. If you just write a book, then no, it doesn't have value other than materials that can be collected from it.
Just because some crazed person invests hours into something doesn't mean that it has value. Real world demand for a virtual world item is a product of mental instability. Anyone that would buy a pretend sword from someone needs help:)
In-game theft should be dealt with in the game. Next thing to happen on this line of thinking is pulling quarters out of children's ears is going to be illegal because the child may have wanted to have kept the pretend quarter in their head. Do you really want the government to tell you that you can't even pretend to steal or kill?
Can I press charges against someone in counter-strike for killing me and taking my gun?
Please... this is the biggest pile of BS I've seen in a long time!
If you get robbed in a game, retaliate in the game, don't try to get any real authorities involved unless they caused real damage by breaking real laws.
No, he won't continue to make grammatical mistakes because the Grammar Nazis have free reign on Slashdot.
Honestly, I think some of you are just French language biggots who were, unfortunately for everyone involved, born in an English speaking country.
Besides, this is like a Slashdot Grammar Nazi fork bomb. You correct one mistake by making two. I don't know what kind of crazy person would complain about someone else's grammar in a sentance beginning with a conjunction and use a conjunction to connect two different tenses of verbs.
Now I'm sure I've made more than two grammatical errors despite my best attempts because I've said more. Someone will undoubtable reply "Don't use propositions to end sentances with" and we will plunge into a flame war over when and where one should use a ';' or a ':'.
After the dust settles, nothing will be different: people will still use 'then' instead of 'than' and vice-versa, people will still complain about the use of 'then' instead of 'than', and people will still complain about people complaining about a sentance they understood perfectly.
Just to be on topic at some point... Read The Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy by the late Douglas Adams. The series is easily the best comedy written this century. My favority line is "You're turning into a penguin, Ford... Stop it!"
Actually, I don't mind much that it uses a central tracker. That's what gives it something over gnutella.
I agree with your premise that tracker failure is a problem though. From the buzz on IRC, I hear that trackers are being hit by massive denial of service attacks.
My ideal solution would be distributing the trackers and having more of them. There is now a Java Servlet implementation available that uses JDBC to store information, so you can hide the DB server, and have multiple trackers on far ends of the net. This will make BitTorrent more scalable.
I definately agree with the multiple port issue... They have pretty unique hashes of files that I dare say would work great in protocol headers... a few bytes isn't going to hurt.
Another thing I would love to see from the community (go check out the BTPorts list on yahoo groups) is a java applet and/or activeX etc. controls for downloading files. If they did this, and it reached large download sites like fileplanet, the net would be tremendously better for distributing popular files.
Most of the work that I see that needs to be done is being worked on by people in the community already except for the multiple port issue.
BitTorrent is getting too popular now though, and a better freeloader detection is beginning to be on my top ten list of things to do. There will be downloads with 500 people on them. On some of these, there are so many leachers that some people end up uploading more than downloading. Ideally, you would only want this to occur if you have the same amount of the file as there is distributed throughout the network. Some people have firewalls that are misconfigured (why not use the tracker to fix this?).
If trackers kept track of how much people share to each other (If someone sends me a lot of data I tell the tracker how much data they have sent me per time quantum) and the tracker excluded people with similar netmasks, I think general performance could be improved considerably.
Maybe I want to write an application in Java that has a more dynamic user interface. Swing makes things like this hard. What if you could make a great GUI in seconds in Java using dynamically generated XUL with call outs to Java instead of broken impared JS.
I'm all for duct taping a rendering engine on the front of real Java just because I don't like to deal with any of the popular layout managers for swing. Ideally, I would have my own Java widgets (because swing gets extendible widgets right like no other GUI API anywhere) that were rendered in a sane fasion (plus the native XUL widgets for when you don't need to extend them).
Swing layout is one of the reasons Java GUIs seam to be broken. If you resize a window, you get a lot of grey boxes. Sure, Mozilla could use some double buffering on their resizing, but it doesn't leave me with a gray screen instead of seeing how the components will look after resizing.
It would be even better if you could extend the XUL language in some manner with custom widgets. For example: XUL.registerComponent(MyPhoneEditor,"pho neEditor", XUL.TEXT);
These are all the more reasons why we need a good renderer in Java.
On a side note: Anyone notice that with Java 1.4.2, jazilla starts faster than mozilla? A little over a second for me. It just won't render any web-site properly:) I'm impressed with the speed. Maybe it will send some of those idiot trolls about Java being slow back to the drawing board so they can complain about something else for a while when it gets done.
Re:The situation's aren't comparable.
on
RIAA vs The Economy
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
This is a very interesting idea. In normal economics, you would just balance supply and demand. In economics like software, supply is negligable, and demand can be extremely high. I think what you are getting at is that these economic calculations don't even really apply.
The best way I think there is to price software is with price discrimination, which is probably the next step in the chain it appears. For a better quality product, you'll have to pay more. I think that's were they are trying to head with the new media that will expire. I think they are just running into another dead end that would be theoretically the most profitable for them.
If they really wanted to make money they would cut their fat (their stupid legal/lobbeying) and start charging what the market will bare in the digital world instead of crying over spoiled milk. They aren't paying artists Jack at the moment, and that's going to come back at them if they don't change fast. I'm betting there will be some mom and pop record labels crop up on the internet with enough following to make it worth it for a band.
Just another point that you may want to use to strengthen your arguement for music anyhow: the song writing and distribution could be seen as an investment ammount of work that can lead to a real job like concerts. Most musicians are extremely wealthy for doing so little actual work, if you could actually call it work. I think most people that create software and music do so for their own pleasure, and would do it even if they weren't getting paid to.
The future of all IP industries seems very clear to me: service-oriented market. There are quite a few open source projects out there taking up this model of selling services so they can work more on something they want to. The end goal is a more effecient worker who hardly notices that they are working at all. Musicians are going to have to take a hit and live like us lowly software developers. Some will be wealthy, some will not. I doubt you will see many musicians as wealthy as they are today in the future. All this fuss is about a few people that think they actually worked harder than, or ar better than the man that takes their trash away at 4AM. One day I hope they'll wake up and realize that the empire is falling and once again they'll have to work for their money instead of strangling that trash man for more money for something to listen to while he works.
It'll get better after the large one's fall I'm sure:) Especially in the field of software/music where it doesn't require vast resources to make a decent product.
I've actually tested it... the reason why it doesn't free all memory is that it would take several seconds to do, and it would block other threads access to memory. Basically, if you are about to allocate a lot of storage, call.gc() before it and it is like telling the VM that you are going to need memory fast in a few seconds, and you can wait a few seconds now to ensure it.
If you can't wait, or you aren't going to allocate a lot of memory soon, don't bother with it except for the occassional GC to make sure that garbage doesn't get written to swap.
If you want to periodically free memory, it's just a function call away: System.gc().
Honestly, I've never seen so many inexperienced people complaining.
Really though, you should just let the GC run on it's own. It will run when your memory limit is hit. This is set with -Xmx 64M (which I think is the default). They have this parameter so you can make your program not eat all the system resources, which it will happily do to increase performance.
Type java -X sometime to see all the neat things you can pass. There is a batch mode which will make your vm JIT every time instead of background JIT. There is an -Xincgc I think it's called that will give you an incremental garbage collector that will free memory as needed, or when the CPU is doing nothing useful.
These features are here now until someone figures out a better place to put them. I think -Xbatch has been also used in -server which enables the server hotspot JIT.
FOR YOUR OWN SAKE RTFM!!!:) If you don't have a FM, might I suggest "Mastering Java 2 J2SE 1.4" by John Zukowski. It's a great refernce book for people that know how to program, but not so well in Java. If you don't have a good book, you'll just spend most of your time rewritting the API instead of getting real work done. Also, you'll be complaining on slashdot because you don't know basic function calls like System.gc().
My favorite was the cast issue. He fails to recognize that the code he is talking about is run once, then it is a static cast just like most people use in C++. Something that must by dynamically casted at runtime, on the other hand, will be much faster in Java since it doesn't have to figure out the casting for an object every time you cast. It basically does it once, then it will be able to cast any object of the same time to the same casted type as before.
It's complete idiocy by a person who hasn't spent any significant time using Java.
If you want to critisize Java you must:
A: target memory usage, site a specific API and why in your OPINION you don't like it, or target startup time.
B: have not used C++ techniques of optimization on Java
C: have tried the latest JVM.
D: have checked the bug parade, and found that the issue you are talking about is not currently being fixed or has been in the bug parade for a very long time.
If you don't follow all those, then you are really just taking pot shots at a system that works quite well for a LOT of people. I've never met anyone that didn't like Java after they played with it for a while (except back before 1.3).
There is a SSH server written in Java now that supports all the features that OpenSSh does... I think I'm going to give it a try... no more CRC buffer overflows for me.
Not really... Under fair use law, you are allowed to make one usable backup copy in case the first brakes. I wonder what they are going to do to stop this. Some one will undoubtable claim this would be a method to avoid a copy right mechanism. But this is a silly idea because it would make the federal government guilty of it's own laws, which to a normal person would mean that the DMCA was misinterpretted in order to contradict with this law. (Or maybe it does and no one in congress actually read it, but it should have specifically noted that an older law was invalid if it was contradictory. At least this is what I've seen watching CSPAN and reading a couple not so large bills myself.)
I don't know if anyone has tried to confront the issue from this prospective, but I have seen a lot of "DVD backup" software spam in my mail box. They keep coming, so I think the RIAA/MPAA isn't ready to attack this yet. They want people to forget about this right, but it's not going to happen here:) I'm going to start using my right to back up software a lot more religiously from now on.
Also, I think there were some court cases that allowed you to have software in multiple places for convinience as long as you weren't using both copies at once. As much as Microsoft tries to make you have a copy of Windows for every computer, you only really need one copy per number of uses. If you live alone, have a laptop, and have a workstation at work dedicated to you, you only need one copy of windows for all three machines. I forget how this came about, but it was because "it would be legal to uninstall it from work and install it at home, so since software is licensed to people, not hardware, they can use the software wherever they want provided that it isn't in use in more than one place."
It aplies to media too. You can sell or give a DVD to a friend, and they can watch it, but you can't make a copy and have two showings at the same time. The license passes from one person to another. I don't know how the law differs between mass showing versus a showing to a few friends though.
What bothers me most about this is that you end up paying for the right to view a movie more than once. I shouldn't have to pay for a right to see the movie more than once. All other costs should be media. After I see it in the theatre, I have paid for the content already. After this, it shouldn't be considered piracy to get a copy from a friend. Especially since I don't agree to any license at the theatre. After this, you go buy a DVD and pay for the content yet again. Then you buy the directors cut, and pay for the content yet again. It's not very ethical that everyone has to pay the same royalties 8 times. Then when I go buy a DVD-R disk to back up those movies, I pay a tax to the MPAA yet again. The MPAA wants you to pay every time you view the content, but why should you have to pay for the right to view the content more than once?
I don't think so. Most other students in the class that were math majors were striving to make B's on the tests. I actually looked at the homework questions from time to time. They were pretty much the same caliber as the test, she just assigned MORE problems instead of different problems. Ever looked at the work section of any math text book, even higher levels? They are the same questions over and over. There are only like 5 different kinds of questions in a section.
I looked at some of what the text book said as well. Most of it was just proofs. Any book that tells you how to do everything is bad, and most math books are this way: "This is how you take a derivative of e^f(x)" etc. Books should concentrate on why things are the way they are, not on the way things are. I used to tutor math back in highschool, and I find more times than not when someone is doing poorly in class it's because they are trying to "learn" the way things are, not the way they work. The more of these shinanigan teaching methods hit a student, the less likely they are to ever learn real math and problem solving skills.
This is where the clash occured in my class. Other than myself, I would say only about half the students in the class actually understood the material, the other have just knew the material. This is where tests differintiate between the two. If you just know the material, you'll be able to solve problems that you've seen before. If you understand the material, you'll not have a problem doing any variation of the problem.
My hypothesis is that tests are only share about 80% material that is in the text book. The teacher has a mind of his/her own and will sometimes throw in questions they think students should be able to get, that they haven't seen before. This is where understanding the problem will give you an A, where knowing the problem will give you a B. Other mathematicians have tried to sumerize this difference between intelligence and knowledge with the phrase "Math isn't about knowing the answers, it's about what to do when you don't know the answer."
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I think you mean sarcasm, but it is pretty ironic that less people know the difference now that /. had an article on it. I'm glad I don't read any of the articles!
You are so right!
/.er for your help in making me to realize the errors of my ways.
I don't know why I ever thought that persistant state across a cluster of machines was a good idea. Why didn't I just send queries to the database every single page load?
MVC is overrated. Struts and Webwork are toys so that developers don't have to do mindless work like design a web page. Taglibs are no match for cut'n'paste of PHP code.
JDBC's gaurantee of levels of ANSI SQL compliance is stupid, who would want to use a database other than MySQL? Hibernate and JDO are silly; why would anyone want to map objects directly to rows in a database.
JavaMail API is no match for PHP's mail sending and recieving. Who would want to support both IMAP and POP3 without writing their own code to handle each?
I can't believe I've been using JSP and Servlets so long that I thought they were fast. No one ever uses many function calls to warrant actually including them in wholistic benchmarks. I know I've never developed anything more complicated than select * or hello world. I'm glad most of these benchmarks use BlackDown as their JRE, because we know a good JIT isn't worth the effort. Though I don't use anything complicated in my scripts, the speed of floating-point math that isn't IEEE compliant is so important, I would have a special section for it in my benchmark.
I can see all those enterprise level companies that link their inventory, customer relation, warrenty information, and tech support altogether crying because they should have used Personal HomePage for their corperate infrastructure.
Well, I'm going to go burn all my JSP books now that I can sleep better knowing they aren't useful. All those wonderful 404 links really clued me in to my idiocy. Thank you brave
8 is the only cube too, silly /.er
10 is semetrical vertically, pretty much.
According to dictionary.com, at least one possible definition of grammar includes semantics.
BTW, it is not ironic that I would be hit by a Grammar Nazi when argueing against them, or in a story that is pretty much about grammar, before someone bends the meaning of ironic yet more.
Irony, as I understand it, is the belief that an outcome is contradictory to that which would be considered the norm. I would consider it a norm that someone complaining about grammar would not know the difference between grammar and semantics. I think it is ironic though that the guy complaining about grammar is supported by the dictionary against a Grammar Nazi. I would have expected to have been wrong, in a grammatical arguement considering my hatred of grammar.
It is ironic that in a Slashdot story trying to define irony that you would get irony wrong. If you had said "This post is ironic" you would be both true and false because you can't possibly expect both outcomes simultaneously. This is actually a paradox though, but most people don't get paradoxes wrong.
Irony, though, only exists in the mind of the person understanding a statement or happening. To you, rain on your wedding day may be ironic because somehow, in your head, you may have thought that it couldn't rain on your wedding day.
You may now think that it's ironic that a definition of a word could be so fickle, but it's abstract and quantitative, like beauty. That is to say, some things are more ironic than others, some things are ironic to more people than others, and anything is probably ironic to at least one person.
So would people stop telling other people what is ironic and what is not? Probably not because most people insist on telling others what is beautiful or not (see Fox for examples). I think my sense of beauty, like my sense of irony, is also different from the norm too, because I tend to think that starving stuck-up people are beautiful neither externally nor internally.
Therefore; screw you fox for telling me that my sense of beauty is wrong, screw you alanis moriset for being so stupid that rain on your wedding day is actually ironic to you, and most of all screw you Grammar Nazis for wasting my time with your often wrong accusation of the improper use of the English language that is just a derivative of a derivative of Latin. Here's one for you language purists (Grammar Nazis and the French) why don't you still speak Latin? The hipocracy is too great for me to ever take a language purist seriously.
I think you have a skewed definition of slow. Maybe I should say:
1. Get a Pentium maching with 32M Ram.
2. Run hello world in Java.
3. Reboot into Linux and run HelloWorld.
It took longer to reboot, so Linux and C is Slower than Java?
I think what you mean is that Java takes too long to start, and I, and everyone in the whole community, agrees with you. However, if you say that a Java program is unusable for user interaction on a pentium, you're just trolling.
You're point is the focus of this release of Java, I would say. 30% cut back in start times. On 400Mhz machines, Java still starts command line programs pretty much instantly now. At least it is fast enough to interact with despite that you are loading a VM every time you run a program.
The Java community is actually outraged that SUN keeps pushing the shared VM technology further back. Imagine if your hello world program only needed to be loaded and interpretted. I think the overhead of creating a new process may exceed the overhead of Java. At that point, I think your arguement would be pointless. This is what we, the developers, are working for. I just hope you or others like you aren't so short sighted that you can't see that Java performance is that close at hand.
Java is really made for people that want to make large projects. If you have some 2-bit project that wouldn't benefit from all the safety checking, you should use C probably, but then again, would performance be an issue for a small task?
I thought the whole point of Java was that it made life easier on programmers, so how can you say that you can program faster in C++ unless you are ignoring memory management? What about using non-STL libraries? Will other developers still understand your code if you use wxWindows instead of GTK? Java makes programming easier both the first time, and when you have to come back and add functionality.
You may compare Perl to Java, but then you would loose the performance arguement, but win the easy to program arguement, but loose the easy to maintain arguement, and win the quick start arguement. Java's regular expression engine is significantly faster than Perls (as in levels of magnitude, not petty 10%'s).
Java is a good all around best choice for most programing tasks, unless you can understand LISP. It excels in daemon work, but never really gets used there. Consider that you will never have buffer overflows, you will usually not have to restart daemons, and Java has a framework for single threaded TCP/IP IO. You could also reduce memory footprint by having one VM load several TCP/IP server "modules".
I can't believe those friggen Grammar Nazis have been escalated to front page news.
Before long people will throw logic to the wind as long as you cross your T's and dot your I's.
If you don't post in iambic pentameter with a definate rhyming scheme, you'll be ignored.
So, now all we need is moderation categories +1 beautiful, -1 spelling, -1 grammar, -1 invalid use of a colon, and -1 poor word choice.
Next month, from the grammar dept., we'll be discussing the spelling of the letter H. It's actually spelled aitch. Maybe I should have submitted it as a story?
The power of general idiocy is still greater than the Grammar Nazis because irregardless is now in most dictionaries despite the fight they tried to put up.
If you find this story interesting, I'm sure you will find the history of the word "ain't" (originally "an't" in the 1700's) much more interesting. To make a long story short, it was a word used by upper class as well as lower, but the "Usage Panel" decided one day that it was a sign of ignorance, so it was pretty much had it's status as a word revoked. Those very people use the improper conjugation with another contraction ending up with "aren't I". So, I would rather respond to people that say "aren't I" with "I don't know, but I are" just to point out their idiocy in not using the correct word "an't". Those that avoid the topic altogether say "am I not?". In any case, the phrase "Say it ain't so!" will always ensure that this word will never be lost.
I have better things to do than talk about grammar, so it's back to watching the grass grow for me.
You've played too much Contra on the original NES.
I still like the old IRC gag that has spread to Warcraft3 as well, so here is the apt slashdot version: Press Alt+F4 (or Ctrl+q) for excellent Karma.
Now if only they could press F8 while the XBox booted, they could bypass all this security, right?
You know, I'm usually the first man upset when people say "Java is slow" without evidence, but I think performance improvement is a valid question of any new product. It's even more of a question when the new release actually is about performance to a degree. So... I wonder who modded you flaimbait, and why.
On topic though, I've noticed a lot of performance enhancements. If you don't load a GUI, you're program will start pretty much instantly, and will only take about 5M of RAM for a small program. GUI's will take 6M more just because. I'm sure a lot of the 6M is external to the VM and/or frame buffers.
In any case, I'm happy that my programs keep getting faster without me having to touch them. Also, now they work on the Itanium2, I can put that in the marketing material. (All with no coding/work on my part.) Sometimes, you have to really appreciate the good sides of Java.
Well, the problem was going to be Microsoft shipping their technology for free, and no competition (IE, they were going to do the same thing they were doing to netscape). They are going to ship .Net runtimes, and then all the programers have one extra reason to program for .Net that they don't Java, which tilts the scales of fair competition toward MS. That's what this case was about.
.Net). Now that things have changed (.Net) it would follow that MS clients would no longer need the JRE MS ships.
.Net with the OS (like they were going to do with IE), or B) force them to include competing products (maybe they should have to include perl and python as well?). Either way, it stems from MS's verticle integration in the marketplace giving them an unfair market advantage. If they can hook you on one product, you have to run every peice of the MS puzzle. Java threatens this domination by allowing third party developers to write programs that will run on hardware and operating systems that the developer couldn't have even imagined. This makes software completely unreliant on market fads, and the software improves with the OS, JRE, and hardware. Java doesn't care if you are using MySQL or MSSQL, it's all the same.
The other cases in the past were about MS shipping broken versions of the JRE that actually caused Java more harm than good. SUN had an agreement with MS a long time ago to let them continue shipping theing JRE because MS clients were reliant on their JRE at the time (but that didn't change because MS didn't give them any incentive to change until
When you combine these two arguements, the logical arguement is to A) prevent MS from shipping
This scares MS a lot, which is why they wanted to mutilate it from the start. If they have control of the VM, they can always make it preform better on their OS and hardware. SUN hasn't taken advantage of Java like this (thus Java on Solaris is horrible compared to windows).
Basically, this ruling is saying that it is OK for MS to ship products with their operating systems without including 3rd party competing products. It's a complete reversal of the Netscape issue that lead to a government investigation and almost a break up of the MS company. What was wrong before the monopoly investigation (or before Bush took office, your choice) is now just fair trade.
I think in order to show a copyright breach, they may have to show that at least one person unlicensed to use a product downloaded the product from them. Then to determine how much damage this has done, they will have to get a tally the number of illegal transfers of a song occured, multiply that by the value of the song (1$ if it's on iTunes). The biggest cost may likely end up being court costs and legal fees, but I don't think a judge is going to be very keen on awarding reasonable legal fees greater than the cost of the suit altogether.
I really don't know what this is going to mean, probably nothing in the end except drawing attention to themselves. I hope they sue so many people that everyone has at least someone they know that ended up in court over it. This way their illegal trust under the gues of an "association" will start to crumble because of lack of people willing to buy their product.
They will never get rid of copyright infringement, but they may drive it underground like software piracy has been driven (mostly). The most probably outcome of this case is absolutely nothing (not even the cases they say they are going to file). If the cases get filed, they will give up after the 100, and start trying to strong arm the government into mass enforcement of a civil case, or give up on the whole idea. If they continued to press the issue, I think fans and artists would revolt if the companies actually comprising the RIAA didn't just give up their membership because that would be such a stupid idea. Everyone is guilty, and legal cases cause people stress, and generally just anger them. Those that don't get sued, and are reasonable, will feal sympathy for those that got caught, because they are just as guilty themselves.
If they push much more, they face the prospect of competition from other labels, or self-publishing artists where the artists don't like to see their fans hurt, and are already only getting 5 cents a song or so. The artists need to wisen up that they are getting screwed both ways. People aren't getting access to their music, and they aren't getting paid nearly what they ought to be.
As long as people know that artists are only getting 5 cents a song, they aren't going to feel too bad about the musicians they love only getting screwed out of a nickle if they don't buy the song; whereas, if they buy the song, 95% of the money goes to sue their buddy across the hall in their dorm, or pay someone's salary that help make the decision to sue his buddy across the hall.
Is breaking a copyright really even a criminal case? If it were criminal, then it wouldn't result in an award to a third party. It was my understanding that copyright cases had to be filed by the person who's rights were violated, then they are taken to court in a civil suit where they are sued.
Even if it is a criminal case, that would really only mean that local police are supposed to handle it, correct? Doesn't it really have to be a felony before the FBI are supposed to get involved?
My problem with this whole thing is that it is escalating the seriousness of copyright law so that the burden of prosecution is moved from the copyright holder to the federal government.
In any case, they won't be able to take you to any significant level of court for downloading a few songs, movies, and even software if they can't prosecute you for more than 50$ or so. So, since iTunes has songs for a 1$, you can get away with about 49 songs per copyright holder.
This is all assuming that a criminal case can't/won't be brought against you. Not that they will ever come after anyone for downloading songs unless you get made an example out of. Of course, that would make for very bad publicity. (More to the artists than the labels.)
---Multipart message---
---Part 1---
So, you are trying to tell me that a government is spending money to keep a company afloat so what, that they don't have an unemployment problem?
Sounds to me like anyone with half a brain would rather let something good crop up from the ashes that might actually be productive for the country, not vise-versa.
Maybe I'm just not seeing this from the right perspective.
Can you explain why this is happening, how it is supposed to work, and what the benefit to the average South Korean is for this to continue?
Is it market saturation, and SK wants to keep the company afloat for long enough for another to fall?
Why the general tarrif?
There are more questions than answers, and I can only imagine it gets worse the more you dig.
This is friggen memory chips... before we can get legislation through to lift this tarriff, there will be more demand than the American market can handle probably in 6 months. If our economy wasn't tanking because Bush's poor economic plan, I'm sure the demand would already be there.
---Part 2; Content-Type: Rant/Troll---
Why not fix the root problem by hitting Bush in the head with a shovel until he learns the basic principals of economics. What am I saying, he can't learn. I know someone that saw him speak once. He quoted Bush: "I think we should teach more Latin in school so we can speak with our Latin American friends." My friend thought he was joking because no one could be that stupid and just started cracking up. One of the security officers nudged him and said, "He's serious."
Haha, I was going to post the same thing. I'm suprised many people even remember VMS versioning, but it was done pretty good I would say. Maybe listing all the versions with an ls was a bad idea, that should probably be a different command. Besides, I hate seeing file~ whenever an editor wants to save a backup copy.
I, for one, will be the first idiot to jump on the versioning train when it gets here in a pre-alpha form that is gauranteed to crash. It's such a useful concept, and implementing it at application level is just not as good in a lot of respects.
I actually had the fortune to work with someone that had ADD and Tourette syndrome. He drank Mt. Dew like he was addicted. When I worked with him, things happened instantly, and mostly flawlessly. He was excellent at coming up with neat algorithms that I ordinarily wouldn't come up with, and I just had the ability to design and implement the ideas almost as quick as he came up with them.
The moral of the story, I think, is that with a little variety, you can find combinations of people that have a lot of quirks, yet the job gets done quicker and better than a team of 8 and twice the time.
Everytime he tried cutting back on caffeine, he had problems focusing. He also had problems sleeping if he didn't have the proper medication and lighting. He had SAD. He took a lot of medication, and for him, as he described it, it was a matter of experimentation. The speed/caffeine (caffeine amplifies medication most of the time, and it specifically seems to help his ADD he said) combination is what he said worked best for him, but for some reason he was always being moved to different medications.
Altogether a great guy, and I think his quirks actually helped him in a lot of ways. The more diverse your team, the more different perspectives there are to weigh.
You're kind of tap dancing around the issue a bit, I think, but you know what the problem is. If someone gives value to something in a pretend world, they have problems seperating fantasy from the real. Laws shouldn't encourage mental health problems.
:)
If you write a book, it may not have value, it depends on if it has purpose in the real world. If you write a book to sell because people want to read it to be entertained or learn something, then it has value. If you just write a book, then no, it doesn't have value other than materials that can be collected from it.
Just because some crazed person invests hours into something doesn't mean that it has value. Real world demand for a virtual world item is a product of mental instability. Anyone that would buy a pretend sword from someone needs help
In-game theft should be dealt with in the game. Next thing to happen on this line of thinking is pulling quarters out of children's ears is going to be illegal because the child may have wanted to have kept the pretend quarter in their head. Do you really want the government to tell you that you can't even pretend to steal or kill?
Can I press charges against someone in counter-strike for killing me and taking my gun?
Please... this is the biggest pile of BS I've seen in a long time!
If you get robbed in a game, retaliate in the game, don't try to get any real authorities involved unless they caused real damage by breaking real laws.
No, he won't continue to make grammatical mistakes because the Grammar Nazis have free reign on Slashdot.
Honestly, I think some of you are just French language biggots who were, unfortunately for everyone involved, born in an English speaking country.
Besides, this is like a Slashdot Grammar Nazi fork bomb. You correct one mistake by making two. I don't know what kind of crazy person would complain about someone else's grammar in a sentance beginning with a conjunction and use a conjunction to connect two different tenses of verbs.
Now I'm sure I've made more than two grammatical errors despite my best attempts because I've said more. Someone will undoubtable reply "Don't use propositions to end sentances with" and we will plunge into a flame war over when and where one should use a ';' or a ':'.
After the dust settles, nothing will be different: people will still use 'then' instead of 'than' and vice-versa, people will still complain about the use of 'then' instead of 'than', and people will still complain about people complaining about a sentance they understood perfectly.
Just to be on topic at some point...
Read The Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy by the late Douglas Adams. The series is easily the best comedy written this century. My favority line is "You're turning into a penguin, Ford... Stop it!"
Actually, I don't mind much that it uses a central tracker. That's what gives it something over gnutella.
I agree with your premise that tracker failure is a problem though. From the buzz on IRC, I hear that trackers are being hit by massive denial of service attacks.
My ideal solution would be distributing the trackers and having more of them. There is now a Java Servlet implementation available that uses JDBC to store information, so you can hide the DB server, and have multiple trackers on far ends of the net. This will make BitTorrent more scalable.
I definately agree with the multiple port issue... They have pretty unique hashes of files that I dare say would work great in protocol headers... a few bytes isn't going to hurt.
Another thing I would love to see from the community (go check out the BTPorts list on yahoo groups) is a java applet and/or activeX etc. controls for downloading files. If they did this, and it reached large download sites like fileplanet, the net would be tremendously better for distributing popular files.
Most of the work that I see that needs to be done is being worked on by people in the community already except for the multiple port issue.
BitTorrent is getting too popular now though, and a better freeloader detection is beginning to be on my top ten list of things to do. There will be downloads with 500 people on them. On some of these, there are so many leachers that some people end up uploading more than downloading. Ideally, you would only want this to occur if you have the same amount of the file as there is distributed throughout the network. Some people have firewalls that are misconfigured (why not use the tracker to fix this?).
If trackers kept track of how much people share to each other (If someone sends me a lot of data I tell the tracker how much data they have sent me per time quantum) and the tracker excluded people with similar netmasks, I think general performance could be improved considerably.
/. ate my XUL part of the example becaus I forgot to put it in code format:
<XUL>
<component type="phoneEditor" name="homePhone"/>
</XUL>
(next time I'll learn to preview.)
Maybe I want to write an application in Java that has a more dynamic user interface. Swing makes things like this hard. What if you could make a great GUI in seconds in Java using dynamically generated XUL with call outs to Java instead of broken impared JS.
o neEditor", XUL.TEXT);
:) I'm impressed with the speed. Maybe it will send some of those idiot trolls about Java being slow back to the drawing board so they can complain about something else for a while when it gets done.
I'm all for duct taping a rendering engine on the front of real Java just because I don't like to deal with any of the popular layout managers for swing. Ideally, I would have my own Java widgets (because swing gets extendible widgets right like no other GUI API anywhere) that were rendered in a sane fasion (plus the native XUL widgets for when you don't need to extend them).
Swing layout is one of the reasons Java GUIs seam to be broken. If you resize a window, you get a lot of grey boxes. Sure, Mozilla could use some double buffering on their resizing, but it doesn't leave me with a gray screen instead of seeing how the components will look after resizing.
It would be even better if you could extend the XUL language in some manner with custom widgets.
For example:
XUL.registerComponent(MyPhoneEditor,"ph
These are all the more reasons why we need a good renderer in Java.
On a side note:
Anyone notice that with Java 1.4.2, jazilla starts faster than mozilla? A little over a second for me. It just won't render any web-site properly
This is a very interesting idea. In normal economics, you would just balance supply and demand. In economics like software, supply is negligable, and demand can be extremely high. I think what you are getting at is that these economic calculations don't even really apply.
:) Especially in the field of software/music where it doesn't require vast resources to make a decent product.
The best way I think there is to price software is with price discrimination, which is probably the next step in the chain it appears. For a better quality product, you'll have to pay more. I think that's were they are trying to head with the new media that will expire. I think they are just running into another dead end that would be theoretically the most profitable for them.
If they really wanted to make money they would cut their fat (their stupid legal/lobbeying) and start charging what the market will bare in the digital world instead of crying over spoiled milk. They aren't paying artists Jack at the moment, and that's going to come back at them if they don't change fast. I'm betting there will be some mom and pop record labels crop up on the internet with enough following to make it worth it for a band.
Just another point that you may want to use to strengthen your arguement for music anyhow: the song writing and distribution could be seen as an investment ammount of work that can lead to a real job like concerts. Most musicians are extremely wealthy for doing so little actual work, if you could actually call it work. I think most people that create software and music do so for their own pleasure, and would do it even if they weren't getting paid to.
The future of all IP industries seems very clear to me: service-oriented market. There are quite a few open source projects out there taking up this model of selling services so they can work more on something they want to. The end goal is a more effecient worker who hardly notices that they are working at all. Musicians are going to have to take a hit and live like us lowly software developers. Some will be wealthy, some will not. I doubt you will see many musicians as wealthy as they are today in the future. All this fuss is about a few people that think they actually worked harder than, or ar better than the man that takes their trash away at 4AM. One day I hope they'll wake up and realize that the empire is falling and once again they'll have to work for their money instead of strangling that trash man for more money for something to listen to while he works.
It'll get better after the large one's fall I'm sure
I've actually tested it... the reason why it doesn't free all memory is that it would take several seconds to do, and it would block other threads access to memory. Basically, if you are about to allocate a lot of storage, call .gc() before it and it is like telling the VM that you are going to need memory fast in a few seconds, and you can wait a few seconds now to ensure it.
If you can't wait, or you aren't going to allocate a lot of memory soon, don't bother with it except for the occassional GC to make sure that garbage doesn't get written to swap.
If you want to periodically free memory, it's just a function call away: System.gc().
:) If you don't have a FM, might I suggest "Mastering Java 2 J2SE 1.4" by John Zukowski. It's a great refernce book for people that know how to program, but not so well in Java. If you don't have a good book, you'll just spend most of your time rewritting the API instead of getting real work done. Also, you'll be complaining on slashdot because you don't know basic function calls like System.gc().
Honestly, I've never seen so many inexperienced people complaining.
Really though, you should just let the GC run on it's own. It will run when your memory limit is hit. This is set with -Xmx 64M (which I think is the default). They have this parameter so you can make your program not eat all the system resources, which it will happily do to increase performance.
Type java -X sometime to see all the neat things you can pass. There is a batch mode which will make your vm JIT every time instead of background JIT. There is an -Xincgc I think it's called that will give you an incremental garbage collector that will free memory as needed, or when the CPU is doing nothing useful.
These features are here now until someone figures out a better place to put them. I think -Xbatch has been also used in -server which enables the server hotspot JIT.
FOR YOUR OWN SAKE RTFM!!!
It's more junk than you even pointed out :)
My favorite was the cast issue. He fails to recognize that the code he is talking about is run once, then it is a static cast just like most people use in C++. Something that must by dynamically casted at runtime, on the other hand, will be much faster in Java since it doesn't have to figure out the casting for an object every time you cast. It basically does it once, then it will be able to cast any object of the same time to the same casted type as before.
It's complete idiocy by a person who hasn't spent any significant time using Java.
If you want to critisize Java you must:
A: target memory usage, site a specific API and why in your OPINION you don't like it, or target startup time.
B: have not used C++ techniques of optimization on Java
C: have tried the latest JVM.
D: have checked the bug parade, and found that the issue you are talking about is not currently being fixed or has been in the bug parade for a very long time.
If you don't follow all those, then you are really just taking pot shots at a system that works quite well for a LOT of people. I've never met anyone that didn't like Java after they played with it for a while (except back before 1.3).
There is a SSH server written in Java now that supports all the features that OpenSSh does... I think I'm going to give it a try... no more CRC buffer overflows for me.
Not really... Under fair use law, you are allowed to make one usable backup copy in case the first brakes. I wonder what they are going to do to stop this. Some one will undoubtable claim this would be a method to avoid a copy right mechanism. But this is a silly idea because it would make the federal government guilty of it's own laws, which to a normal person would mean that the DMCA was misinterpretted in order to contradict with this law. (Or maybe it does and no one in congress actually read it, but it should have specifically noted that an older law was invalid if it was contradictory. At least this is what I've seen watching CSPAN and reading a couple not so large bills myself.)
:) I'm going to start using my right to back up software a lot more religiously from now on.
I don't know if anyone has tried to confront the issue from this prospective, but I have seen a lot of "DVD backup" software spam in my mail box. They keep coming, so I think the RIAA/MPAA isn't ready to attack this yet. They want people to forget about this right, but it's not going to happen here
Also, I think there were some court cases that allowed you to have software in multiple places for convinience as long as you weren't using both copies at once. As much as Microsoft tries to make you have a copy of Windows for every computer, you only really need one copy per number of uses. If you live alone, have a laptop, and have a workstation at work dedicated to you, you only need one copy of windows for all three machines. I forget how this came about, but it was because "it would be legal to uninstall it from work and install it at home, so since software is licensed to people, not hardware, they can use the software wherever they want provided that it isn't in use in more than one place."
It aplies to media too. You can sell or give a DVD to a friend, and they can watch it, but you can't make a copy and have two showings at the same time. The license passes from one person to another. I don't know how the law differs between mass showing versus a showing to a few friends though.
What bothers me most about this is that you end up paying for the right to view a movie more than once. I shouldn't have to pay for a right to see the movie more than once. All other costs should be media. After I see it in the theatre, I have paid for the content already. After this, it shouldn't be considered piracy to get a copy from a friend. Especially since I don't agree to any license at the theatre. After this, you go buy a DVD and pay for the content yet again. Then you buy the directors cut, and pay for the content yet again. It's not very ethical that everyone has to pay the same royalties 8 times. Then when I go buy a DVD-R disk to back up those movies, I pay a tax to the MPAA yet again. The MPAA wants you to pay every time you view the content, but why should you have to pay for the right to view the content more than once?
I don't think so. Most other students in the class that were math majors were striving to make B's on the tests. I actually looked at the homework questions from time to time. They were pretty much the same caliber as the test, she just assigned MORE problems instead of different problems. Ever looked at the work section of any math text book, even higher levels? They are the same questions over and over. There are only like 5 different kinds of questions in a section.
I looked at some of what the text book said as well. Most of it was just proofs. Any book that tells you how to do everything is bad, and most math books are this way: "This is how you take a derivative of e^f(x)" etc. Books should concentrate on why things are the way they are, not on the way things are. I used to tutor math back in highschool, and I find more times than not when someone is doing poorly in class it's because they are trying to "learn" the way things are, not the way they work. The more of these shinanigan teaching methods hit a student, the less likely they are to ever learn real math and problem solving skills.
This is where the clash occured in my class. Other than myself, I would say only about half the students in the class actually understood the material, the other have just knew the material. This is where tests differintiate between the two. If you just know the material, you'll be able to solve problems that you've seen before. If you understand the material, you'll not have a problem doing any variation of the problem.
My hypothesis is that tests are only share about 80% material that is in the text book. The teacher has a mind of his/her own and will sometimes throw in questions they think students should be able to get, that they haven't seen before. This is where understanding the problem will give you an A, where knowing the problem will give you a B. Other mathematicians have tried to sumerize this difference between intelligence and knowledge with the phrase "Math isn't about knowing the answers, it's about what to do when you don't know the answer."