I just don't think search engines are about "customizations". They're about getting results that are relevant and readable. While A9 gives somewhat decent results, I don't think I'll use it because I think the interface is clumsy (albeit customizable, but again that's not what I'm looking for)
Yeah? Well I just used it to search for something. Not only did I get links to what it thinks I'm looking for (which are good), but there are images crammed on to the page of what I was looking for too. That's too cluttered for me.
Now, on Google, there's that nice bar of links at the top. I can do one search on the web, then click images if I want to see images, news if I want to see news, etc.
A9 does try to present too much in its results. It's intrusive and busy. I'm sticking with the g00g.
I guess if you need to define it as such in your argument, for the sake of it I'll go along.
I am merely pointing this fact out and mocked those who think they are holier than someone else.
Isn't mocking someone like judging them? It's not a question of whether or not I'm judging you. There's right and there's wrong. You're wrong. I'm not using my definition of what's right and what's wrong. I'm using the definition of right and wrong. I'm praying for you that you'll one day you'll see things as they are.
But you have still failed to address who will make it for those incapable of making that decision and without a parent to guide them.
If I suggested that the church (any denomination), what would you say then?
Should they just be thrown to the media wolves?
No, and it would do the media wolves well to go to church themselves.
Maybe you should reconsider the benefactor of your prayers.
It's nothing like the gun argument. The "Shit's complex yo." line really adds to your credibility too.
Who will do the parenting for them? Why don't you do it? No one is judging. It's clear to me the problem is too many people like you can't see the differnce between right and wrong; it's all shades of gray. That's why we have a society of bastard kids running around. Since they don't have a role model at home, someone would rather legislate it.
Right and wrong isn't pretty. But it is what it is. You haven't learned that. I'm not passing judgement on you, it's clear in your post. I'm sorry for you and I'll pray for you.
And, getting back to the whole tv thing, I agree that if I don't think it's right, I'll make the call. The government shouldn't do that for me.
You bring up a good point there. Windows works pretty much the same on all computers its installed on. Linux (GNU stuff included, not just the kernel) varies from distribution to distribution (e.g. Debian is different from Slackware is different from [fill in the blank]) in the way the configuration files are stored, the startup scripts are run, etc.
If I want to configure something on my Windows machines (Win98, WinXP) I know I can go to the control panel and do it there using basically the same interface on both machines. I don't care how it actually works under the hood. I care that I can make it work the way I want and be able to do it on both machines in a similar way.
Most people are like that. They like familiar, they like easy, they don't necessarily care about details like that.
I'm not judging anyone here because a lot of us like the details. I'm just saying that I don't care about the details anymore. I just want to be able to do my thing.
I fail to see your point. The article you link to is 2 years old. A lot has changed since those days.
I use WinXP pro at work and at home and I couldn't be happier with how easy it is to use and maintain.
OEMs like it when they can hold somebody financially responsible to the shit they install on the machines they sell. People feel more comfortable at home buying from them in turn since somebody on the other end of the line can tell them "Open your browser, click tools, etc." versus "edit/etc/rhosts and make sure [other stuff I forgot about since I don't use Linux anymore]".
Hardware manufacturers aren't exactly thrilled about supporting drivers for Linux. It seems to me Linux can be changed too easily so that suddenly things get broken. I'm not convinced that everyone does enough regression testing when they make a change to ensure driver support for their next release. I remember downloading a verison of WindowMaker and trying like hell to get the thing to compile and install. Finally, I had to dig up some obscure howto on some website and as it turns out some.so I had was the wrong version. So, I downloaded it and guess what? It broke a few other things.
Windows has had its share of problems too, but I haven't seen them for some time now. I guess I'm trying to say to each his own, but for now I'm sticking with XP. I like to write code, but why should I have to dig into my computer's code and recompile something just to get it to work? I already paid someone to do that for me so I can spend my time here with all of you.
Do I want it easy or secure? Windows is ubiquitous because it's easy. Linux is secure, but complicated and therefore mostly ignored (for desktop use anyway--something that demands drivers be installed). I like Windows because installing drivers is easy. I'd like Linux, but it's hard to install and configure drivers.
You could think of all the paper you won't have stuffed in the door to your apartment/house thanks to email.
Seriously, how could you argue that this is spam? And how is this any different than putting up a billboard, stuffing flyers in your windshield wipers or putting ads on tv?
Other than the usual "I'm for America and the American worker" blatherskite that either candidate will put out, you may find some substance if you dig deep enough. How else are you going to reach the public at large who would otherwise just as soon not vote? How else are you going to get an otherwise issue ignorant public educated on what you stand for and to get excited about your position? What's it going to take to get you to ask questions and find the answers about the next four years?
Could Microsoft's desire to buy Google have to do with Google actually making a profit? Seriously, Fletcher's claims of Microsoft trying to censor web content is preposterous. MSN search results are "limited" is because sites that want to be "found" on MSN have to pay. No one has to pay to be on Google. Google makes money because advertisers know that's the first place anyone will go to find anything on anything. With that kind of audience, Google can ask a lot for page space.
I think you all need to take a step back and look at the big picture. It isn't about censorship. It's about profit, pure and simple. Would you take over a competitor that was failing and had absolutely no potential to turn itself around?
I used to work in retail and I can tell you it is good money to have on the side. Usually, the people who do the schedule are flexible and will let you work whenever you would like.
However commission based sales are a tricky business. Several years ago, I worked at a well-known department store that paid you a base hourly rate and commission. The thing is, if your commission did not meet or exceed what you would have been paid at your hourly rate, you only got your hourly rate and on the next pay schedule, you had to make up the difference before you could start counting the commission you earned toward your next paycheck.
Some people who work at these stores are also very aggressive and will do nearly anything to get their commission, even if it means sometimes taking credit for a sale you made. Trust no one at first. Handle all of your transactions yourself. Find out what items on the floor pay the most in commissions. Sell the extended warranties.
I had some internal conflicts before. There was a particular camera that paid $10 for each one you sold by the manufacturer. The thing is, it was a piece of junk that I think was designed to break in 6 months. I sold the daylights out of those but I hated myself for it.
Finally, it's a little late in the holiday season to be thinking about a retail job. Most department stores are going to start laying off their holiday help in the next week or so. And with retailers reporting less than impressive profits, it will be hard to find work there about now.
After reading the article and (briefly) looking at the website, I'd have to agree. But, it is different than Ant in that it is an application compiled for the native platform it's running on.
So now there's an Ant alternative in the works. Coming from Bram, it'll be a good one.
...that if the government hires a non-employee to write code, the government makes said non-employee sign all kinds of papers specifically stating that whatever s/he "invents" on behalf of the government belongs to the government exclusively and they can do with it whatever they want.
Honestly, I can't believe that they're wasting time on this issue.
That was a lot of fun. I remember the best games were about 4 pages long (front and back two columns per page in small print). The BASIC games were fine, but the games written in octal (where you used the machine language editor MLX to enter) were easier because there was a checksum at the end of each line.
I had a friend who did a paper route to buy his C64. Then, he learned BASIC, and was very soon programming games. Before we turned into c64 h4x0rz, he made BASIC versions of Choplifter and Pac-man to name a few. They were very slow and the graphics were made up of redefined character sets, but they were free and fun. I still remember he spent a lot of time making the REM flower boxes at the top like you see in a lot of GPL source today--before GPL was widely known.
Native compilation doesn't make any sense on the Java platform. Consider the way things are now:
The JVM and the command line tools used to launch the JVM are the only platform-specific code in the JDK.
Porting to different platforms is cake because you need only change the JVM and the command-line tool launchers.
The rest of the JDK is ported for free since they are all Java bytecode files anyway.
If Java was reworked in such a way as to take the binary output and make it so it ran on Linux only, then you have completely violated the primary intent of the platform. Sure, the code is "portable" in the sense that you can recompile it on, say Windows, and it will "work". But the idea of Java is write once, run anywhere. That means without having to do anything to the binary output. That's why you have a virtual machine.
Java is not perfect. It has some flaws and annoyances. But Java is the Virtual Machine. Without it, no Java.
If you're worried about memory usage, startup time, application integrity and speed, then take the time to read this and this. A lot of the problems with Java aren't problems with Java; the problem is the programmers not using the platform correctly or wanting to take the time to learn how to use it.
Java is not going to run as fast as a native application with the HotSpot VM, but there are others available if you want them. I can't give you the urls for any, but if you really want one bad enough, you'll find it.
If you use Sun's JDK (I use 1.3.1_02 on Windows--yes Windows), you have the option to download the source code for the runtime libraries. There is a file called src.jar. In it, you will find the.java source for all of the classes that come with the JRE.
You will also find java.c, java.h, java_md.c, java_md.h. Now, I'm no C/Windows programmer, but after reading those files, they appear to be skeletons for what you would need to build your own VM launcher. So, if you were distributing a Java application to customers who use Windows, you could code your own VM launcher so that your customers could launch their applications by clicking an icon on their desktop without opening a Run box or CMD Prompt and typing 'java ClassName'.
I guess I just don't see the value in looking at the source code for the VM. As I said, I'm not a C programmer (but I know and have programmed it before) so looking at platform specific code to me is worthless.
Further, the specifications are available for the Java Languge and the virtual machine. If you are so inclined, you should roll your own.
My company (an IT consulting/staffing firm) throws very successful parties.
Some of the things that make the party successful:
Lots of food. Not just any food, but good, high-quality food. The philosophy is that food relaxes you. Things like Shrimp, fried things (chicken wings, chipoltas, etc.), veggies, fruit, cookies--comfort food.
A bar with everything. Mixed drinks, beer, soda, water, whatever.
People greeting you at the door with a huge smile. Even if it isn't sincere, it can be very effective in getting people to relax and feel comfortable.
Good party music. Hire a good DJ with a decent sound system. It's good if the DJ doesn't get too involved in the party; too many games may scare off some of the introverts.
The most important thing to getting people to relax and open up is to invite upper management to the party. If they're personable folk, they'll mingle and enjoy the party too. Our upper management always attends all of our company
parties, wherever they are in the country.
One caveat is that you need to be prepared to spend a lot of money. You do these things and I guarantee you that everyone will open up and let their hair down.
'If it was under the control of the FBI, with appropriate technical safeguards in place to prevent possible misuse, and nobody else used it -- we wouldn't detect it,'
That's a risky assumption.
'However we would detect modified versions that might be used by hackers.'
How do you know if a [cracker] is using an unmodified version on my PC and is watching me? You don't.
There is no such thing as an 'appropriate technical safeguard'; the way to defeat it simply has not been discovered yet.
Slashdot Mirror
I just don't think search engines are about "customizations". They're about getting results that are relevant and readable. While A9 gives somewhat decent results, I don't think I'll use it because I think the interface is clumsy (albeit customizable, but again that's not what I'm looking for)
Yeah? Well I just used it to search for something. Not only did I get links to what it thinks I'm looking for (which are good), but there are images crammed on to the page of what I was looking for too. That's too cluttered for me.
Now, on Google, there's that nice bar of links at the top. I can do one search on the web, then click images if I want to see images, news if I want to see news, etc.
A9 does try to present too much in its results. It's intrusive and busy. I'm sticking with the g00g.
ITS THE EXACT SAME THING.
I guess if you need to define it as such in your argument, for the sake of it I'll go along.
I am merely pointing this fact out and mocked those who think they are holier than someone else.
Isn't mocking someone like judging them? It's not a question of whether or not I'm judging you. There's right and there's wrong. You're wrong. I'm not using my definition of what's right and what's wrong. I'm using the definition of right and wrong. I'm praying for you that you'll one day you'll see things as they are.
But you have still failed to address who will make it for those incapable of making that decision and without a parent to guide them.
If I suggested that the church (any denomination), what would you say then?
Should they just be thrown to the media wolves?
No, and it would do the media wolves well to go to church themselves.
Maybe you should reconsider the benefactor of your prayers.
I'll add the media wolves to my list.
It's nothing like the gun argument. The "Shit's complex yo." line really adds to your credibility too.
Who will do the parenting for them? Why don't you do it? No one is judging. It's clear to me the problem is too many people like you can't see the differnce between right and wrong; it's all shades of gray. That's why we have a society of bastard kids running around. Since they don't have a role model at home, someone would rather legislate it.
Right and wrong isn't pretty. But it is what it is. You haven't learned that. I'm not passing judgement on you, it's clear in your post. I'm sorry for you and I'll pray for you.
And, getting back to the whole tv thing, I agree that if I don't think it's right, I'll make the call. The government shouldn't do that for me.
The more people who run Linux, the more people can tailor it or screw it up. OEMs want a line drawn in the sand to something that's supportable.
You bring up a good point there. Windows works pretty much the same on all computers its installed on. Linux (GNU stuff included, not just the kernel) varies from distribution to distribution (e.g. Debian is different from Slackware is different from [fill in the blank]) in the way the configuration files are stored, the startup scripts are run, etc.
If I want to configure something on my Windows machines (Win98, WinXP) I know I can go to the control panel and do it there using basically the same interface on both machines. I don't care how it actually works under the hood. I care that I can make it work the way I want and be able to do it on both machines in a similar way.
Most people are like that. They like familiar, they like easy, they don't necessarily care about details like that.
I'm not judging anyone here because a lot of us like the details. I'm just saying that I don't care about the details anymore. I just want to be able to do my thing.
I fail to see your point. The article you link to is 2 years old. A lot has changed since those days.
/etc/rhosts and make sure [other stuff I forgot about since I don't use Linux anymore]".
.so I had was the wrong version. So, I downloaded it and guess what? It broke a few other things.
I use WinXP pro at work and at home and I couldn't be happier with how easy it is to use and maintain.
OEMs like it when they can hold somebody financially responsible to the shit they install on the machines they sell. People feel more comfortable at home buying from them in turn since somebody on the other end of the line can tell them "Open your browser, click tools, etc." versus "edit
Hardware manufacturers aren't exactly thrilled about supporting drivers for Linux. It seems to me Linux can be changed too easily so that suddenly things get broken. I'm not convinced that everyone does enough regression testing when they make a change to ensure driver support for their next release. I remember downloading a verison of WindowMaker and trying like hell to get the thing to compile and install. Finally, I had to dig up some obscure howto on some website and as it turns out some
Windows has had its share of problems too, but I haven't seen them for some time now. I guess I'm trying to say to each his own, but for now I'm sticking with XP. I like to write code, but why should I have to dig into my computer's code and recompile something just to get it to work? I already paid someone to do that for me so I can spend my time here with all of you.
Do I want it easy or secure? Windows is ubiquitous because it's easy. Linux is secure, but complicated and therefore mostly ignored (for desktop use anyway--something that demands drivers be installed). I like Windows because installing drivers is easy. I'd like Linux, but it's hard to install and configure drivers.
It worked for Microsoft.
You could think of all the paper you won't have stuffed in the door to your apartment/house thanks to email.
Seriously, how could you argue that this is spam? And how is this any different than putting up a billboard, stuffing flyers in your windshield wipers or putting ads on tv?
Other than the usual "I'm for America and the American worker" blatherskite that either candidate will put out, you may find some substance if you dig deep enough. How else are you going to reach the public at large who would otherwise just as soon not vote? How else are you going to get an otherwise issue ignorant public educated on what you stand for and to get excited about your position? What's it going to take to get you to ask questions and find the answers about the next four years?
Spam? No. Candidate education? Yes.
Could Microsoft's desire to buy Google have to do with Google actually making a profit? Seriously, Fletcher's claims of Microsoft trying to censor web content is preposterous. MSN search results are "limited" is because sites that want to be "found" on MSN have to pay. No one has to pay to be on Google. Google makes money because advertisers know that's the first place anyone will go to find anything on anything. With that kind of audience, Google can ask a lot for page space.
I think you all need to take a step back and look at the big picture. It isn't about censorship. It's about profit, pure and simple. Would you take over a competitor that was failing and had absolutely no potential to turn itself around?
Come on, people!!
I used to work in retail and I can tell you it is good money to have on the side. Usually, the people who do the schedule are flexible and will let you work whenever you would like.
However commission based sales are a tricky business. Several years ago, I worked at a well-known department store that paid you a base hourly rate and commission. The thing is, if your commission did not meet or exceed what you would have been paid at your hourly rate, you only got your hourly rate and on the next pay schedule, you had to make up the difference before you could start counting the commission you earned toward your next paycheck.
Some people who work at these stores are also very aggressive and will do nearly anything to get their commission, even if it means sometimes taking credit for a sale you made. Trust no one at first. Handle all of your transactions yourself. Find out what items on the floor pay the most in commissions. Sell the extended warranties.
I had some internal conflicts before. There was a particular camera that paid $10 for each one you sold by the manufacturer. The thing is, it was a piece of junk that I think was designed to break in 6 months. I sold the daylights out of those but I hated myself for it.
Finally, it's a little late in the holiday season to be thinking about a retail job. Most department stores are going to start laying off their holiday help in the next week or so. And with retailers reporting less than impressive profits, it will be hard to find work there about now.
After reading the article and (briefly) looking at the website, I'd have to agree. But, it is different than Ant in that it is an application compiled for the native platform it's running on.
So now there's an Ant alternative in the works. Coming from Bram, it'll be a good one.
...that if the government hires a non-employee to write code, the government makes said non-employee sign all kinds of papers specifically stating that whatever s/he "invents" on behalf of the government belongs to the government exclusively and they can do with it whatever they want.
Honestly, I can't believe that they're wasting time on this issue.
This could get modded as offtopic, but having experienced flow myself in my job is extremely cool.
Someone should develop a new version of that awesome game
They have. Check out planetfibble.com/rds/. Enjoy!
That was a lot of fun. I remember the best games were about 4 pages long (front and back two columns per page in small print). The BASIC games were fine, but the games written in octal (where you used the machine language editor MLX to enter) were easier because there was a checksum at the end of each line.
I had a friend who did a paper route to buy his C64. Then, he learned BASIC, and was very soon programming games. Before we turned into c64 h4x0rz, he made BASIC versions of Choplifter and Pac-man to name a few. They were very slow and the graphics were made up of redefined character sets, but they were free and fun. I still remember he spent a lot of time making the REM flower boxes at the top like you see in a lot of GPL source today--before GPL was widely known.
It's Racing Destruction Set. After I posted, I went hunting really fast and found this. I can see many hours of my time already gone now...
It fits into this genre; you designed a track and then you drive it alone or with a friend. My friends and I used to play that all the time.
Native compilation doesn't make any sense on the Java platform. Consider the way things are now:
If Java was reworked in such a way as to take the binary output and make it so it ran on Linux only, then you have completely violated the primary intent of the platform. Sure, the code is "portable" in the sense that you can recompile it on, say Windows, and it will "work". But the idea of Java is write once, run anywhere. That means without having to do anything to the binary output. That's why you have a virtual machine.
Java is not perfect. It has some flaws and annoyances. But Java is the Virtual Machine. Without it, no Java.
If you're worried about memory usage, startup time, application integrity and speed, then take the time to read this and this. A lot of the problems with Java aren't problems with Java; the problem is the programmers not using the platform correctly or wanting to take the time to learn how to use it.
Java is not going to run as fast as a native application with the HotSpot VM, but there are others available if you want them. I can't give you the urls for any, but if you really want one bad enough, you'll find it.
If you use Sun's JDK (I use 1.3.1_02 on Windows--yes Windows), you have the option to download the source code for the runtime libraries. There is a file called src.jar. In it, you will find the .java source for all of the classes that come with the JRE.
You will also find java.c, java.h, java_md.c, java_md.h. Now, I'm no C/Windows programmer, but after reading those files, they appear to be skeletons for what you would need to build your own VM launcher. So, if you were distributing a Java application to customers who use Windows, you could code your own VM launcher so that your customers could launch their applications by clicking an icon on their desktop without opening a Run box or CMD Prompt and typing 'java ClassName'.
I guess I just don't see the value in looking at the source code for the VM. As I said, I'm not a C programmer (but I know and have programmed it before) so looking at platform specific code to me is worthless.
Further, the specifications are available for the Java Languge and the virtual machine. If you are so inclined, you should roll your own.
Some of the things that make the party successful:
parties, wherever they are in the country.
One caveat is that you need to be prepared to spend a lot of money. You do these things and I guarantee you that everyone will open up and let their hair down.
Slashdot is (mostly) compliant with what the book is saying to do... if you set your options to Light HTML...
Maybe you should login and see for yourself...
'If it was under the control of the FBI, with appropriate technical safeguards in place to prevent possible misuse, and nobody else used it -- we wouldn't detect it,'
That's a risky assumption.
'However we would detect modified versions that might be used by hackers.'
How do you know if a [cracker] is using an unmodified version on my PC and is watching me? You don't.
There is no such thing as an 'appropriate technical safeguard'; the way to defeat it simply has not been discovered yet.