After researching, I found an FDA warning about it. I'm not sure that it is Kava-Kava itself, or just the process it undergoes, or just a strange reaction that some people have though. The people native to the island of it's origin, whom consumed it for years never seemed to have problems, so it could be just a certain drug companies method for extraction. If you remember the movie medicine man, I'm pretty sure that is the drink that they are making where they chew the root then spit. Extraction has changed a lot since then:)
Sobe is down to 98 cents at a local walmart(is this true everywhere?). (good)Water costs nearly as much now. Besides, sobe doesn't digest steak overnight, and doesn't come in an aluminum can that is disolved by the acid(pH is around 3 I think) and collects in the base of your brain:). Other than that, you can get Ginkgo, which really helps you to think (and it helps me to exercise as well... I think it helps blood flow in general) or Ginseng or any number of obscure herbs (Kava Kava, Kola Nut, St John Wart, etc.).
All the other products rot your teeth with acid and too much sugar. They are carbonated and actually remove moisture from your body. Mt. Dew also has citric acid to add to the phosphoric, thereby eating even more of your teeth as you drink it.
I like good green tea and gourmette coffee pretty well too.
Actually it is a valid defence if no one else gets pulled over for it. There are cases all the time where the police selectively enforce the law that are thrown out of court.
That being said, this is the most aweful idea I've heard of. Maybe 1% of Americans have never broken a law, but usually get away with it. When you are on a list of automatic suspects, you will get caught more often than other citizens. This isn't blind justice. It's the same thing that other minorities complain about constantly and for good reason usually. If you look muslim right now, you best not even jay-walk or accidentally drop that straw wrapper on the ground, because there is someone there to breath down your throat. This is only spreading this kind of descrimination to the poverty stricken citizens who are forced to live in the slums because the only work they can find is being a garbage man.
no... non-coplanar beams:) because of the compression of the waves because light has a fixed speed, you could measure the velocity. You can measure acceleration with a plane old gyro:) You should get three components with which you can measure mutualy orthagonal components of motion, though you couldn't express those in any standard way (x,y,z just doesn't make sence:) and neither does r,theta, ioyota(I wish I could make greek letters here, because I don't know their names:))) There are some nobel gasses that make light very very accurate in terms of wavelength that you could do it with.
You might have to use a cesium chamber if that doesn't work it ensure that the photon is traveling straight... then you can measure how long it takes to get to the other side:) This is all assuming that the actual speed of light isn't infinite. If it is infinite, then the theory of relativity doesn't make a whole lot of sence:)
has anyone considered that maybe the atomic clock measures time based upon it's velocity? The same goes for quartz.
Just because a clock measures time by how often an electron moves around a neucleus, how fast a crystal spins, or even how fast c12 decays doesn't mean that I experience time in the same fasion. Be sure you aren't trying to measure time with a ruler and call it evidence that they are related:)
Also someone asked how do we know what absolute zero velocity is. According to relativity, we can measure this with three rays of light from three non-coplaner axis, we can measure the difference of the phase shifts to determine which way we are moving absolutly. That is unless someone here says that light shining out of a front of a car going at 65mph travels at the c+65mph. (I'm not arguing that it does or doesn't, it's not a fact until it's proven.)
What do you smoke? well, maybe you actually missed it, but in that first link, it states that the court was upset with how the FBI acted in about 75 cases occuring in 2000 and 2001, not before 2000. Just because a good guy in the mix pointed it quickly, doesn't mean that all the abuse occured before the investigation began. Why is it that everyone is eager to blame the problem on someone else? The FBI is historically corrupt. That's why people don't like the Patriot ACT. Hoover abused his power as the head of the FBI, and no one trusts them til this day. After this ruling, we now know it's for good reason. They use any means available to them whether it's ammoral, unethical, or even illegal for their own agenda.
yeah... I remembered that you could use JBoss with Tomcat and not have to do it... I don't know how how JBoss manages it, but it seems to work ok:) Still, Tomcat is slower than Jetty. Tomcat is cool for that wierd Warp connector to Apache so that you can run PHP and JSP's on virtual hosts without having to do much configuration and still use the same port 80 for both.
Tomcat is slower than Jetty in all cases that I've seen (I've not seen them all, so test it for yourself). Tomcat wants to be restarted everytime you deploy a new context(or I'm just stupid and don't know how to set it up right). Jetty is an embedded small fast implementation, that will run on it's own, but I recommend JBoss! With JBoss, you can create good war or ear files that you just drop in a directory to make things work. No hassle unless you can't write a simple deployment descripter and use jar, in which case you have bigger problems. If you think JBoss will use too much memory, you can just disable all most of it's services and it will be just fine. JBoss loads in anywhere from 7s (minimal services on fast machine) to 60s (all services on a ~400Mhz machine with 64+ M of ram, UDMA enabled on your hard drive, and IBM's JRE). Get a copy of JBoss and play with it. The only reason to run Tomcat is if you want to run Apache (because you like the way it does virtual hosts or you need PHP or modperl for some other project).
Java on Linux is a complicated thing to get good results from. You need a good VM, and the one's from Sun are getting better. I recommend that you take a look at IBM and JRockit as well and compare them for your own use. They are both have no cost, but are pretty fast. JRockit is pretty robust. I use the Sun VM now just because I need 1.4 features.
Yeah, our apartments are against this kind of thing too... for just 25$, you can build a table that can hold plants and is waterproof as well as recieve and transmit 2.4Ghz bands.:) As long as they don't ask about the cable going to the table, I won't put a lamp on it.
for overtime or any of his expenses developing it. There was no contract nor request for this from a manager at work, so, this is not related to his job in any way. How would you like it if you were sued by a company you worked for 10 years ago for your increased productivity because of experience? Experience is part of the pay and is in no way are you obligated for your use of it. Basically, I don't see how a contract for employment, that was terminated by the employer, is enforcable by the employer in a court. Also, I think his line of reasoning that if it's not patentable, then it's not IP to begin with is very valid even in accordance to the contract. If companies want to ensure that employees don't skip town with their ideas, they should do one of the following: A) for inventors (R&D), they should ask frequently for their ideas that they are working on for their work and have them documented. If they don't come up with anything, then they aren't doing their job, and fire them. B) for developers, they should have slips for every project that the developers must sign before they can work on projects so they have documentation of what the company owns. Any ideas not covered by A or B are not part of what the company pays for, and are therefore not the companies. The burden of proof MUST lie on the company because the developer or the inventor has no way of proving that he didn't come up with the idea on company time, but the company could if in fact it was true and they took care to document what IP is theirs.
I think they'll have to deal with two points though, as this isn't like stealing a car. Who's copying the files, the man with them or the man downloading them? If you say the man sharing them, then you have to prove that he intended for people to download them that didn't own the CD. What if you don't get all the file from one person? Point 2 is the backup factor. You are entitled one backup copy, and they will have to PROVE that you don't own them before they can get a warrent. There is no method of proving that you do or don't if you claim you are using your backup copy because you lost the original in a fire.
That wouldn't be a bad arguement if you couldn't sell your spare tire.
The point is, Gateway, Dell, and friends are being harmed just as much as the consumer because of this action. That doesn't make it less wrong, but more. Now instead of just the consumer getting hurt by not getting refunds for software that they didn't want (Which MS's own licence states that they will refund it), Dell and friends have to eat the cost of the returned software? or have unhappy customers, or at least be operating with a higher overhead.
With a second layer of bad ethics and business practices by MS, you would think that the FTC would do something about it. Not only is it hurting consumers, but also other businesses that aren't even in the same market as MS.
Not many people like MS. It's forced on a lot of people because their place of work uses it, or some class assignments require it. The reason why it isn't fixed is because Bush got a lot of money from MS last election cycle. That, and MS used the money it makes from their monopoly to hire every good prosecution lawyer in the US so that the government can't. Bill Gates has enough money and cash flow to buy his way around legal issues and still turn a significant profit. If MS didn't abuse its monopolistic powers, their would be much more money floating around the market. Some of this money would no doubt find it's way to RedHat (from the OEM's).
This could be just what we need to convince the ignorant sheep out there that they need 4096 kilobit encryption. First place to start is E-Mail and instant messangers. Second place, whether it's legal or not, is the telephone system. That should put a spin on any TIA system. At least anyone that tries will be forced to concentrate effort on only pertinant information. When someone has to put down their donut and drive down to someone's house to spy on them, they can't be doing it to the entire world.
Hey, then we can block telemarketers and spammers because we won't have their key. Don't forget, you have to physically hand a key to someone in order for it to be truely secure, else you are trusting whoever you hand it to. This only needs to be done for personal calls/email. It isn't very likely that someone will use a business call against you.
That's true in very few circumstances though. The #1 bottleneck on a system is going to be network bandwidth. The second is going to me IO. Lastly, the CPU of the server usually goes unused. If you're going to have to execute the SQL anyhow, it should be moved to the server to cut back on Network utilization. Also, sometimes, the overall CPU usage of the server can be reduced by moving multiple statements into a stored procedure on the server. Some DBMS's compile or preparse the SQL in the stored procedures, or if nothing else, you can link to a C function.
The problem I have with stored procedures it makes your application database specific. I've never ran out of CPU before hard disk throughput, so I've been using JBoss(J2EE) to force security the way I want. Even with using a middle tier on the same computer, I can still saturate a 100Mbit connection. If it ever becomes a problem, I'll upgrade the 700mhz processor and 128M of ram to an Athlon 2000XP and 512M of ram for about 300$. If the average developer got paid 50$/h, then it would be better than spending over 6 hours of tuning performance, and it would be over 3 times faster. If you use J2EE, and you have to make it work for an impossibly large client base, you could always get a DBMS that supports replication(since it will work with all DBMS with a JDBC driver) and just throw more commodity 600$ machines at the job.
I don't know what you are doing to use 100% of the CPU on the server for 50-100 clients, but maybe you should get a book on DBMS theory. If you normalize the database and create some indexes, you'll find that just about anything will support that many users. Well, as long as you aren't spawning processes every time a client makes a request (CGI is a very bad thing).
My god man! The JVM doesn't have registers nor stacks. You simply refernce the variables. The JVM itself decides weather a variable is a register or whatever the system supports. That's why Java was written to begin with, to improve portability. Most people can't optimize their C/C++ programs for all CPU's. So, they invented a very very CISC VM. That way a program written in Java can take advantage of all 32 MIPS registers or the 8 or so x86 integer registers and the floating point stack.
Agreed. You don't have to use all of EJB's features that slow down the program on simple programs to get some benefit. I like the security model. Sometimes you need row level security on data, and EJB's make that easy (a couple of lines of code). I don't like data in inconsistant states at all, so transactions that work across multiple database servers is great and it's all configurable in an XML file so I can remove transaction points without toying with the code. DBMS independance is my favorite selling point. If I find a faster database server than MySQL (with InnoDB for transactions) I could change it with one file. If you want to "Upgrade" to Larry Elisson land, or you have to write it to be compatible with a system that is tied to MS's not quite SQL server, you won't have to change your code when the legacy system is reimplemented into the new J2EE system.
Honestly, some people need to rethink how much performance is really worth? If you can save time by not having to write transactions, security, and testing both (which is a REAL PAIN), you can spend the money or time you saved there to either optimize or buy more hardware (since it supports clustering without you having to write any code, just more machines).
I've used both MySQL and PostgreSQL pretty extensively, but I want to play with one of the other five or six free and open source DBMS's. (hsqldb, firebird, and SAP to name a few)
PostgreSQL is cool because you can make your own objects with simple C routines, or use C for embedded procedures and link to them at run time. It's actually quite usefull sometimes. Most people assume that MySQL is faster than PostgreSQL because it does less. That's really not all that true if you take advantage of the features that it has. Embedded SQL will reduce your network traffic and allow you to work with the data directly on the DBMS. This also reduces the latency between queries. Ex. to transfer money from account 1 to account 2 you would need two (4 if you include begin and commit) queries. The first query would be issued to deduct from account 1, then you would wait for the DBMS to OK the query through the network or other means, then you would send the second. With embedded procedures, you would tell the DBMS to call your procedure which would do both in one shorter command.
Slashdot could have a procedure that takes user_id and story_id and it could look up the user's preferences with an SQL and only return the data needed (null for bodies that wouldn't show). If they run the web-sever and perl script on a seperate computer, the network traffic would be reduced by a large factor over just quering all the data and changing it in perl.
The moral is, you can use features you don't _need_ to make PostgreSQL be faster than MySQL. Then latter, when something comes up instead of saying, "I wished I had a view/sub-select/embedded procedure" you'll get whatever you need done in less time. Don't forget that PostgreSQL has REAL embedded perl procedurs, embedded SQL, or just linking to shared libraries at runtime to access functions written in any language capable of compiling down to a.so library:) (assembler, C, C++, or anything you care to write a wrapper for)
I guess an good analogy would be: If you only use the first three gears of a 5 speed sports car, it won't go as fast as third gear in a 3 speed family car. Just because you don't need that fourth gear doesn't mean you can't use it to your advantage. Using embeded procedures marries your project to DBMS's that support them, but it is quick and easy to port between them (all you have to do is rewrite the procedures and it will work anywhere).
Implementations are NOT good. Take the top compilers used today, (Intel's, MS VC++, GCC, Borland) and see how many programs compile on all of them! This is precisely why it's a failure. ISO/ANSI itself is a failure because there are relatively no standards that they have produced that have been followed such that code is portable.
GC that isn't at least a compile time option (preferably a run-time option), is useless to those who actually need it. One spec implementation is worth a hundred good other implementations. Reasons: 1) Not tied to different licences. 2) All compilers will support it on all platforms. 3) It would actually be used where needed.
In the example that you site as a good place for native GUI's is the most ignorant arguement I've seen on slashdot to date. Not even Java promised that you wouldn't have to rewrite the GUI for PDA's. (Don't quote hype, find a trusted source where SUN claimed you could run the same code on a PDA) The GUI's are fundamentally different in that case. The look AND the feel of the program should be customizable by the user. That is the promise of Java's LNF. You can choose native if you want, but the LNF is seperate from the code, therefore, you don't have to rewrite the GUI to make it look or feel different. The user ultimately should decide how the program behaves. Any arguement to the contrary is ridiculous.
http://www.iso.ch/iso/en/aboutiso/annualreports/ 20 01/index.html excuse me but I think the fact that they have a financial statement is enough proof that they are a for profit entity. Though ANSI is nonprofit, the only real spec they are known for is the one that causes my ls to be colorful:) At least it seems to be the only one that stuck. Besides, if the ANSI standard was so hard to implement, one could argue that the tools used to implement it where inferior. Just think about that one for a moment.
This loss of control as you would call it is what ensures that my program will run on ANY Java runtime environment. Can you say that your C/C++ code will compile on ANY C/C++ compiler??? Don't be so ignorant to ask SUN to destroy something good. They have a JCP that decides the fate of Java, and SUN makes sure that it is implemented properly or not at all. If SUN wasn't in control, C# would have been J++ and not a single thing SUN or the JCP would have done could have mattered. SUN has and is making it possible for open source implementations of Java to be certified. Have you not been reading the Apache-Sun conversations? Soon there will be free test suites for nonprofit and open source implementations of the Java specs. Not that you can't implement the spec all you want, you just can't say it's certified if it isn't. You can create uncertified open source java all day, Apache and JBoss has been doing it for years. You can derive it to be whatever you want. You just can't call it certified until it passes the tests. I only wished C/C++ was like that. That alone would be enough that I would still be using it. There's the difference that SUN sees between ISO/ANSI and the JCP.
C++ was a great technology and may be again someday and still has it's place, but that doesn't excuse your ignorance about the JCP/SUN.
I'll just start by saying that I'm not just a Java programmer. I have about 5 years of experience in C++. I did mainly server side programming and no real GUI, just moving around data.
C/C++ do not give you complete control over execution. You can't tell me you don't link to libraries. If you don't, then you are throwing away hours of time that your competition is adding features. At some level, you have to deal with an OS that may or may not work the way you expact as well.
Java does manage to do garbage collection for about 20% penalty, and LISP isn't bad at all itself. If other people can do it right, then why not C/C++? It really doesn't have to be as bad as people make it out to be. Think about the logistics of it sometime. It wouldn't be difficult or too taxing to keep a hierarchy of pointers in a central class/table and call a cleanup function every 10 seconds or so to check where pointers have changed and which memory addresses allocated are no longer being referenced. I would like for it to be done at the language level because frankly, the people who would care enough to do such a thing to begin with would probable not have memory leaks anyhow. Those that do debug their software should be writting more good software and features instead of debugging something that is unneccisary. Not that GC should be forced, but it should at least be an option!
Just because there is an ISO/ANSI standard for C/C++ doesn't mean that people follow it, yet they still call it C or C++. At least with Java, if it has the cup, you know it passed the certification. Don't get me wrong though, it's not that I don't think it should be open to the public, I just don't think it should be called C or C++ when it isn't really. Honestly, do you think that GCC is perfectly ANSI compliant? I don't see how since v3 caused everyone to fix some of their non-ANSI code. It still supports multi-line string literals despite the ANSI standard. There's as much of an ANSI standard for C/C++ as there is for SQL. It's very difficult to write SQL or C/C++ code that works on multiple compilers in the way you intend. ISO/ANSI has been a complete failure in ensuring that the standard is followed.
I think that even for the user's sake there needs to be some consistancy between GUI's. Native GUI's are a terrible thing in most cases. Just because it looks like the host operating system doesn't make it a good thing. Really, the most successful programs are skinnable and look nothing like the host OS. Winamp and Trillian are good examples on the windows side where massive amounts of people have adopted programs that don't look like windows. Also, I would say, gkrellm is a great example for Linux. Native GUI's aren't really all that good of a thing.
Don't be so afraid of Java. ISO/ANSI are independant companies for profit themselves. I fail to see the difference between them and the JCP. Java applets that I wrote as a student 6 years ago still work today, can you say the same for all of your C++ programs? Do they still compile? Do they still run in binary form? Yes to both on the Java side of things. The world is going to GC whether C/C++ wants to go or not. Micrsoft, IBM, SUN, Apple, and even Oracle know it.
Except that for Java it doesn't need to be debugged, the JRE does all the memory allocation and deallocation for you. If C/C++ is to last into the future, it really is going to have to handle the memory allocation fiasco at run-time. While OSS has the advantage of infinite codeing time, in the real world, coders have a salary. It takes time to debug memory leaks. I don't think that there are many developers out there that can program good enough to make up the cost in added hardware it would take to run Java at the same speed. Even if they could, their talants would be much better spent adding new features to compete than slaving over a memory leak. Before I write code, I ask myself if 20% faster code is justification for all the work of porting my app to other hardware, hours (if not days) debugging memory leaks, and hours of recoding the functionality of the java class library that I need. Tools like this and LGPL'd libraries adjust the equation, but they won't tip it until I can depend on ANSI C/C++ compiling my code on virtually every platform (including the GUI) and there is a garbage collection system set up for C++ that doesn't cut performance by more than that same 20%.
Languages shouldn't be free as in beer. There needs to be one standard in Java, and SUN provides just that. Just like Larry Wall controls Perl and guides it into the 21st Century, there has to be some organization to do the same for C/C++ or it will surely grow old and die. C was a good language for it's time, but if it is as rigid as assembler, it will suffer the same fate. Ask yourself how difficult it is to write a GUI in C/C++ that will work on more than one platform. GUI's are as standard as iostreams now, yet there is no standard for programming GUI's.
This is just a bandaid over a severed limb, and there are several more limbs that aren't looking to good either.
Slashdot Mirror
After researching, I found an FDA warning about it. I'm not sure that it is Kava-Kava itself, or just the process it undergoes, or just a strange reaction that some people have though. The people native to the island of it's origin, whom consumed it for years never seemed to have problems, so it could be just a certain drug companies method for extraction. If you remember the movie medicine man, I'm pretty sure that is the drink that they are making where they chew the root then spit. Extraction has changed a lot since then :)
I did not know that. I'll avoid the one's that contain Kava Kava from now on. Where did you find this?
Nope, I have as many Y chromosomes as the next guy.
I don't like to spend a lot of money on drinks, but you can get green tea and coffee and make your own for cheaper than most energy drinks.
I like green tea because it doesn't taste like ass and doesn't kill me.
I like gourmette coffee because, "When I drink my coffee I like to taste it." (Pulp Fiction)
Sobe is down to 98 cents at a local walmart(is this true everywhere?). (good)Water costs nearly as much now. Besides, sobe doesn't digest steak overnight, and doesn't come in an aluminum can that is disolved by the acid(pH is around 3 I think) and collects in the base of your brain :). Other than that, you can get Ginkgo, which really helps you to think (and it helps me to exercise as well... I think it helps blood flow in general) or Ginseng or any number of obscure herbs (Kava Kava, Kola Nut, St John Wart, etc.).
All the other products rot your teeth with acid and too much sugar. They are carbonated and actually remove moisture from your body. Mt. Dew also has citric acid to add to the phosphoric, thereby eating even more of your teeth as you drink it.
I like good green tea and gourmette coffee pretty well too.
Actually it is a valid defence if no one else gets pulled over for it. There are cases all the time where the police selectively enforce the law that are thrown out of court.
That being said, this is the most aweful idea I've heard of. Maybe 1% of Americans have never broken a law, but usually get away with it. When you are on a list of automatic suspects, you will get caught more often than other citizens. This isn't blind justice. It's the same thing that other minorities complain about constantly and for good reason usually. If you look muslim right now, you best not even jay-walk or accidentally drop that straw wrapper on the ground, because there is someone there to breath down your throat. This is only spreading this kind of descrimination to the poverty stricken citizens who are forced to live in the slums because the only work they can find is being a garbage man.
no... non-coplanar beams :) because of the compression of the waves because light has a fixed speed, you could measure the velocity. You can measure acceleration with a plane old gyro :) You should get three components with which you can measure mutualy orthagonal components of motion, though you couldn't express those in any standard way (x,y,z just doesn't make sence :) and neither does r,theta, ioyota(I wish I could make greek letters here, because I don't know their names :))) There are some nobel gasses that make light very very accurate in terms of wavelength that you could do it with.
:) This is all assuming that the actual speed of light isn't infinite. If it is infinite, then the theory of relativity doesn't make a whole lot of sence :)
You might have to use a cesium chamber if that doesn't work it ensure that the photon is traveling straight... then you can measure how long it takes to get to the other side
has anyone considered that maybe the atomic clock measures time based upon it's velocity? The same goes for quartz.
Just because a clock measures time by how often an electron moves around a neucleus, how fast a crystal spins, or even how fast c12 decays doesn't mean that I experience time in the same fasion. Be sure you aren't trying to measure time with a ruler and call it evidence that they are related:)
Also someone asked how do we know what absolute zero velocity is. According to relativity, we can measure this with three rays of light from three non-coplaner axis, we can measure the difference of the phase shifts to determine which way we are moving absolutly. That is unless someone here says that light shining out of a front of a car going at 65mph travels at the c+65mph. (I'm not arguing that it does or doesn't, it's not a fact until it's proven.)
> before 2000
What do you smoke? well, maybe you actually missed it, but in that first link, it states that the court was upset with how the FBI acted in about 75 cases occuring in 2000 and 2001, not before 2000. Just because a good guy in the mix pointed it quickly, doesn't mean that all the abuse occured before the investigation began. Why is it that everyone is eager to blame the problem on someone else? The FBI is historically corrupt. That's why people don't like the Patriot ACT. Hoover abused his power as the head of the FBI, and no one trusts them til this day. After this ruling, we now know it's for good reason. They use any means available to them whether it's ammoral, unethical, or even illegal for their own agenda.
yeah... I remembered that you could use JBoss with Tomcat and not have to do it... I don't know how how JBoss manages it, but it seems to work ok :) Still, Tomcat is slower than Jetty. Tomcat is cool for that wierd Warp connector to Apache so that you can run PHP and JSP's on virtual hosts without having to do much configuration and still use the same port 80 for both.
Am I on crack, or isn't the ARM processor built by Intel???
Tomcat is slower than Jetty in all cases that I've seen (I've not seen them all, so test it for yourself). Tomcat wants to be restarted everytime you deploy a new context(or I'm just stupid and don't know how to set it up right). Jetty is an embedded small fast implementation, that will run on it's own, but I recommend JBoss! With JBoss, you can create good war or ear files that you just drop in a directory to make things work. No hassle unless you can't write a simple deployment descripter and use jar, in which case you have bigger problems. If you think JBoss will use too much memory, you can just disable all most of it's services and it will be just fine. JBoss loads in anywhere from 7s (minimal services on fast machine) to 60s (all services on a ~400Mhz machine with 64+ M of ram, UDMA enabled on your hard drive, and IBM's JRE). Get a copy of JBoss and play with it. The only reason to run Tomcat is if you want to run Apache (because you like the way it does virtual hosts or you need PHP or modperl for some other project).
Java on Linux is a complicated thing to get good results from. You need a good VM, and the one's from Sun are getting better. I recommend that you take a look at IBM and JRockit as well and compare them for your own use. They are both have no cost, but are pretty fast. JRockit is pretty robust. I use the Sun VM now just because I need 1.4 features.
Yeah, our apartments are against this kind of thing too... for just 25$, you can build a table that can hold plants and is waterproof as well as recieve and transmit 2.4Ghz bands. :) As long as they don't ask about the cable going to the table, I won't put a lamp on it.
for overtime or any of his expenses developing it. There was no contract nor request for this from a manager at work, so, this is not related to his job in any way. How would you like it if you were sued by a company you worked for 10 years ago for your increased productivity because of experience? Experience is part of the pay and is in no way are you obligated for your use of it. Basically, I don't see how a contract for employment, that was terminated by the employer, is enforcable by the employer in a court. Also, I think his line of reasoning that if it's not patentable, then it's not IP to begin with is very valid even in accordance to the contract. If companies want to ensure that employees don't skip town with their ideas, they should do one of the following: A) for inventors (R&D), they should ask frequently for their ideas that they are working on for their work and have them documented. If they don't come up with anything, then they aren't doing their job, and fire them. B) for developers, they should have slips for every project that the developers must sign before they can work on projects so they have documentation of what the company owns. Any ideas not covered by A or B are not part of what the company pays for, and are therefore not the companies. The burden of proof MUST lie on the company because the developer or the inventor has no way of proving that he didn't come up with the idea on company time, but the company could if in fact it was true and they took care to document what IP is theirs.
I think they'll have to deal with two points though, as this isn't like stealing a car. Who's copying the files, the man with them or the man downloading them? If you say the man sharing them, then you have to prove that he intended for people to download them that didn't own the CD. What if you don't get all the file from one person? Point 2 is the backup factor. You are entitled one backup copy, and they will have to PROVE that you don't own them before they can get a warrent. There is no method of proving that you do or don't if you claim you are using your backup copy because you lost the original in a fire.
That wouldn't be a bad arguement if you couldn't sell your spare tire.
The point is, Gateway, Dell, and friends are being harmed just as much as the consumer because of this action. That doesn't make it less wrong, but more. Now instead of just the consumer getting hurt by not getting refunds for software that they didn't want (Which MS's own licence states that they will refund it), Dell and friends have to eat the cost of the returned software? or have unhappy customers, or at least be operating with a higher overhead.
With a second layer of bad ethics and business practices by MS, you would think that the FTC would do something about it. Not only is it hurting consumers, but also other businesses that aren't even in the same market as MS.
Not many people like MS. It's forced on a lot of people because their place of work uses it, or some class assignments require it. The reason why it isn't fixed is because Bush got a lot of money from MS last election cycle. That, and MS used the money it makes from their monopoly to hire every good prosecution lawyer in the US so that the government can't. Bill Gates has enough money and cash flow to buy his way around legal issues and still turn a significant profit. If MS didn't abuse its monopolistic powers, their would be much more money floating around the market. Some of this money would no doubt find it's way to RedHat (from the OEM's).
4096 kilobit encryption is a bit excessive though... I meant 4096 bit encryption :)
This could be just what we need to convince the ignorant sheep out there that they need 4096 kilobit encryption. First place to start is E-Mail and instant messangers. Second place, whether it's legal or not, is the telephone system. That should put a spin on any TIA system. At least anyone that tries will be forced to concentrate effort on only pertinant information. When someone has to put down their donut and drive down to someone's house to spy on them, they can't be doing it to the entire world.
Hey, then we can block telemarketers and spammers because we won't have their key. Don't forget, you have to physically hand a key to someone in order for it to be truely secure, else you are trusting whoever you hand it to. This only needs to be done for personal calls/email. It isn't very likely that someone will use a business call against you.
That's true in very few circumstances though. The #1 bottleneck on a system is going to be network bandwidth. The second is going to me IO. Lastly, the CPU of the server usually goes unused. If you're going to have to execute the SQL anyhow, it should be moved to the server to cut back on Network utilization. Also, sometimes, the overall CPU usage of the server can be reduced by moving multiple statements into a stored procedure on the server. Some DBMS's compile or preparse the SQL in the stored procedures, or if nothing else, you can link to a C function.
The problem I have with stored procedures it makes your application database specific. I've never ran out of CPU before hard disk throughput, so I've been using JBoss(J2EE) to force security the way I want. Even with using a middle tier on the same computer, I can still saturate a 100Mbit connection. If it ever becomes a problem, I'll upgrade the 700mhz processor and 128M of ram to an Athlon 2000XP and 512M of ram for about 300$. If the average developer got paid 50$/h, then it would be better than spending over 6 hours of tuning performance, and it would be over 3 times faster. If you use J2EE, and you have to make it work for an impossibly large client base, you could always get a DBMS that supports replication(since it will work with all DBMS with a JDBC driver) and just throw more commodity 600$ machines at the job.
I don't know what you are doing to use 100% of the CPU on the server for 50-100 clients, but maybe you should get a book on DBMS theory. If you normalize the database and create some indexes, you'll find that just about anything will support that many users. Well, as long as you aren't spawning processes every time a client makes a request (CGI is a very bad thing).
My god man! The JVM doesn't have registers nor stacks. You simply refernce the variables. The JVM itself decides weather a variable is a register or whatever the system supports. That's why Java was written to begin with, to improve portability. Most people can't optimize their C/C++ programs for all CPU's. So, they invented a very very CISC VM. That way a program written in Java can take advantage of all 32 MIPS registers or the 8 or so x86 integer registers and the floating point stack.
Java isn't slow, java loads slow.
Agreed. You don't have to use all of EJB's features that slow down the program on simple programs to get some benefit. I like the security model. Sometimes you need row level security on data, and EJB's make that easy (a couple of lines of code). I don't like data in inconsistant states at all, so transactions that work across multiple database servers is great and it's all configurable in an XML file so I can remove transaction points without toying with the code. DBMS independance is my favorite selling point. If I find a faster database server than MySQL (with InnoDB for transactions) I could change it with one file. If you want to "Upgrade" to Larry Elisson land, or you have to write it to be compatible with a system that is tied to MS's not quite SQL server, you won't have to change your code when the legacy system is reimplemented into the new J2EE system.
Honestly, some people need to rethink how much performance is really worth? If you can save time by not having to write transactions, security, and testing both (which is a REAL PAIN), you can spend the money or time you saved there to either optimize or buy more hardware (since it supports clustering without you having to write any code, just more machines).
Actually, PostgreSQL is a "Real ORDBMS" :)
.so library :) (assembler, C, C++, or anything you care to write a wrapper for)
I've used both MySQL and PostgreSQL pretty extensively, but I want to play with one of the other five or six free and open source DBMS's. (hsqldb, firebird, and SAP to name a few)
PostgreSQL is cool because you can make your own objects with simple C routines, or use C for embedded procedures and link to them at run time. It's actually quite usefull sometimes. Most people assume that MySQL is faster than PostgreSQL because it does less. That's really not all that true if you take advantage of the features that it has. Embedded SQL will reduce your network traffic and allow you to work with the data directly on the DBMS. This also reduces the latency between queries. Ex. to transfer money from account 1 to account 2 you would need two (4 if you include begin and commit) queries. The first query would be issued to deduct from account 1, then you would wait for the DBMS to OK the query through the network or other means, then you would send the second. With embedded procedures, you would tell the DBMS to call your procedure which would do both in one shorter command.
Slashdot could have a procedure that takes user_id and story_id and it could look up the user's preferences with an SQL and only return the data needed (null for bodies that wouldn't show). If they run the web-sever and perl script on a seperate computer, the network traffic would be reduced by a large factor over just quering all the data and changing it in perl.
The moral is, you can use features you don't _need_ to make PostgreSQL be faster than MySQL. Then latter, when something comes up instead of saying, "I wished I had a view/sub-select/embedded procedure" you'll get whatever you need done in less time. Don't forget that PostgreSQL has REAL embedded perl procedurs, embedded SQL, or just linking to shared libraries at runtime to access functions written in any language capable of compiling down to a
I guess an good analogy would be: If you only use the first three gears of a 5 speed sports car, it won't go as fast as third gear in a 3 speed family car. Just because you don't need that fourth gear doesn't mean you can't use it to your advantage. Using embeded procedures marries your project to DBMS's that support them, but it is quick and easy to port between them (all you have to do is rewrite the procedures and it will work anywhere).
Implementations are NOT good. Take the top compilers used today, (Intel's, MS VC++, GCC, Borland) and see how many programs compile on all of them! This is precisely why it's a failure. ISO/ANSI itself is a failure because there are relatively no standards that they have produced that have been followed such that code is portable.
/ 20 01/index.html :) At least it seems to be the only one that stuck. Besides, if the ANSI standard was so hard to implement, one could argue that the tools used to implement it where inferior. Just think about that one for a moment.
GC that isn't at least a compile time option (preferably a run-time option), is useless to those who actually need it. One spec implementation is worth a hundred good other implementations. Reasons: 1) Not tied to different licences. 2) All compilers will support it on all platforms. 3) It would actually be used where needed.
In the example that you site as a good place for native GUI's is the most ignorant arguement I've seen on slashdot to date. Not even Java promised that you wouldn't have to rewrite the GUI for PDA's. (Don't quote hype, find a trusted source where SUN claimed you could run the same code on a PDA) The GUI's are fundamentally different in that case. The look AND the feel of the program should be customizable by the user. That is the promise of Java's LNF. You can choose native if you want, but the LNF is seperate from the code, therefore, you don't have to rewrite the GUI to make it look or feel different. The user ultimately should decide how the program behaves. Any arguement to the contrary is ridiculous.
http://www.iso.ch/iso/en/aboutiso/annualreports
excuse me but I think the fact that they have a financial statement is enough proof that they are a for profit entity. Though ANSI is nonprofit, the only real spec they are known for is the one that causes my ls to be colorful
This loss of control as you would call it is what ensures that my program will run on ANY Java runtime environment. Can you say that your C/C++ code will compile on ANY C/C++ compiler??? Don't be so ignorant to ask SUN to destroy something good. They have a JCP that decides the fate of Java, and SUN makes sure that it is implemented properly or not at all. If SUN wasn't in control, C# would have been J++ and not a single thing SUN or the JCP would have done could have mattered. SUN has and is making it possible for open source implementations of Java to be certified. Have you not been reading the Apache-Sun conversations? Soon there will be free test suites for nonprofit and open source implementations of the Java specs. Not that you can't implement the spec all you want, you just can't say it's certified if it isn't. You can create uncertified open source java all day, Apache and JBoss has been doing it for years. You can derive it to be whatever you want. You just can't call it certified until it passes the tests. I only wished C/C++ was like that. That alone would be enough that I would still be using it. There's the difference that SUN sees between ISO/ANSI and the JCP.
C++ was a great technology and may be again someday and still has it's place, but that doesn't excuse your ignorance about the JCP/SUN.
yea, a clever reply! :)
I'll just start by saying that I'm not just a Java programmer. I have about 5 years of experience in C++. I did mainly server side programming and no real GUI, just moving around data.
C/C++ do not give you complete control over execution. You can't tell me you don't link to libraries. If you don't, then you are throwing away hours of time that your competition is adding features. At some level, you have to deal with an OS that may or may not work the way you expact as well.
Java does manage to do garbage collection for about 20% penalty, and LISP isn't bad at all itself. If other people can do it right, then why not C/C++? It really doesn't have to be as bad as people make it out to be. Think about the logistics of it sometime. It wouldn't be difficult or too taxing to keep a hierarchy of pointers in a central class/table and call a cleanup function every 10 seconds or so to check where pointers have changed and which memory addresses allocated are no longer being referenced. I would like for it to be done at the language level because frankly, the people who would care enough to do such a thing to begin with would probable not have memory leaks anyhow. Those that do debug their software should be writting more good software and features instead of debugging something that is unneccisary. Not that GC should be forced, but it should at least be an option!
Just because there is an ISO/ANSI standard for C/C++ doesn't mean that people follow it, yet they still call it C or C++. At least with Java, if it has the cup, you know it passed the certification. Don't get me wrong though, it's not that I don't think it should be open to the public, I just don't think it should be called C or C++ when it isn't really. Honestly, do you think that GCC is perfectly ANSI compliant? I don't see how since v3 caused everyone to fix some of their non-ANSI code. It still supports multi-line string literals despite the ANSI standard. There's as much of an ANSI standard for C/C++ as there is for SQL. It's very difficult to write SQL or C/C++ code that works on multiple compilers in the way you intend. ISO/ANSI has been a complete failure in ensuring that the standard is followed.
I think that even for the user's sake there needs to be some consistancy between GUI's. Native GUI's are a terrible thing in most cases. Just because it looks like the host operating system doesn't make it a good thing. Really, the most successful programs are skinnable and look nothing like the host OS. Winamp and Trillian are good examples on the windows side where massive amounts of people have adopted programs that don't look like windows. Also, I would say, gkrellm is a great example for Linux. Native GUI's aren't really all that good of a thing.
Don't be so afraid of Java. ISO/ANSI are independant companies for profit themselves. I fail to see the difference between them and the JCP. Java applets that I wrote as a student 6 years ago still work today, can you say the same for all of your C++ programs? Do they still compile? Do they still run in binary form? Yes to both on the Java side of things. The world is going to GC whether C/C++ wants to go or not. Micrsoft, IBM, SUN, Apple, and even Oracle know it.
Except that for Java it doesn't need to be debugged, the JRE does all the memory allocation and deallocation for you. If C/C++ is to last into the future, it really is going to have to handle the memory allocation fiasco at run-time. While OSS has the advantage of infinite codeing time, in the real world, coders have a salary. It takes time to debug memory leaks. I don't think that there are many developers out there that can program good enough to make up the cost in added hardware it would take to run Java at the same speed. Even if they could, their talants would be much better spent adding new features to compete than slaving over a memory leak. Before I write code, I ask myself if 20% faster code is justification for all the work of porting my app to other hardware, hours (if not days) debugging memory leaks, and hours of recoding the functionality of the java class library that I need. Tools like this and LGPL'd libraries adjust the equation, but they won't tip it until I can depend on ANSI C/C++ compiling my code on virtually every platform (including the GUI) and there is a garbage collection system set up for C++ that doesn't cut performance by more than that same 20%.
Languages shouldn't be free as in beer. There needs to be one standard in Java, and SUN provides just that. Just like Larry Wall controls Perl and guides it into the 21st Century, there has to be some organization to do the same for C/C++ or it will surely grow old and die. C was a good language for it's time, but if it is as rigid as assembler, it will suffer the same fate. Ask yourself how difficult it is to write a GUI in C/C++ that will work on more than one platform. GUI's are as standard as iostreams now, yet there is no standard for programming GUI's.
This is just a bandaid over a severed limb, and there are several more limbs that aren't looking to good either.
HAHAHAHAH my fortune for a mod point :)