cheaper, faster and better. It is called the US Army.
The US Army is part of a government. You don't present evidence to the contrary, so I'll tend to dismiss claims, that it can do anything a business can do "cheaper, faster, and better". A business can not fight a war, so you have to use the army. But if there is anything a business can do, it will do better.
Passionate references to "our boys" and condemnations of "profiteering corporations" seriously impair your credibility -- you seem to repeat someone else's propaganda. Troubles you have with your own words -- such as the misplaced reference to the overused term "food chain" -- make it apparent.
Of course, they have. Because we are afraid to back up our words with any claims of fact. The story reads like a piece of satire -- pointed, bitter, and funny. But its claim to be factual is greatly blunted, by reluctance to name the contracting company and the PC manufacturer involved.
The american consumer does not win in the long term. At best, it's a very short term gain.
What sheer stupidity! And "Insightful" no less...
his own job will be going to India (or wherever) and he won't be able to buy anything tommorow (for lack of income), regardless on how cheap it is.
Yea, we are all doomed, doomed! Unless we close the borders and stop importing things and services.
no job is safe from an Indian worker earning a 10th of what his american counterpart makes
I, for one, welcome the chance the Indian workers get from this situation. However, your understanding of economics is too weak to seriously argue about the prospects for employment in different parts of the world economy.
Ha! "If"... They do exist. And I'm glad the modern infrastructure is being hardened in response to this punks instead of remaining soft and collapsing from sudden hits by a truely hostile party (al'Qaeda, China, whatever).
They are like a vaccine, which causes the organism to develop anti-bodies, that will help fight real deceases.
Re:"Microsoft Violates Human Rights in China"
on
Review: KDE 3.2
·
· Score: 1
I've got a Taiwan flag in mine [...] if RedHat removed it [...] then it sounds like you need to stop using RedHat.
Will this thing help me detect a strange metal object ahead of me -- like a trooper's car in the bushes? I'll be prepared to "overclock" it a little to gain this functionality...
Let me see your receipt... Why is your MD5 hash different from mine? Because you voted differently from me, not as you were told. So now we have to kill your family, and you have to pay back the money you were given to vote as you were told
So your true goal is advancing science (which -- technicaly -- can be done without human presence), but you think, that the only way to get popular support (hence -- Congress funding) is by fooling the masses into thinking, the human presence is needed or somehow useful?
I thought, this missions should be about advancing science not bragging rights. But don't worry, US still holds the "national pride" record of Moon-landing, and, should a need to show-off arrive again (if Chinese land on the Moon, for example), our experience with robotic Mars missions will help us get an astronaut there first.
sending an actual carbon-based unit, not a glorified laptop
According to a recent Economist article (on "Bush's grand but costly visions"), NASA reckons, that adding a human to a space mission increases its cost ten-fold. Which means, we could've sent 10 (probably -- more, thanks to the economies of scale) instead of 2 rovers to Mars at half the price of a single manned mission.
I highly resent the fact that you've called some of the greatest engineers of our time "retarded."
While I'm sure, NASA's engineers are not "retarded", I have no information about their credentials. How do you know, they are among the greatest of our time?
Even if the individual engineers are, indeed, the best among living, another problem may well be with the organization. This is a government organization, after all... Even if all of the brightest techies and scientists dreamed of working for NASA, the brightest managers do not...
There is a difference between break-in-and-entry vs. just entry.
If I leave the door to my house unlocked it isn't an invitation for people to come in.
But it may be an invitation to take a peek inside. Which, in my opinion, more closely resembles what was done.
Better yet, how about I post my credit and medical histories on my mailbox by the entrance. Should I blame the passers-by when bits and pieces of my personal info are discussed in a local bar?
Accessing a network share may seem difficult (and thus more like a break-in) to a computer illiterate person, which is (partially) why the law-makers are all infuriated, but -- when the share is not password protected -- it really is aking to stopping by and reading a posting on a pole. There was no break-in...
Why would you use the Python C API when there is Pyrex?
Because it is not part of Python? I needed to access some functions from our own libraries and Python's C API seemed sufficient if imperfect. I did it, but was left with bad taste in my mouth.
Surely that's easier to do than the TCL API with its stubs weirdness.
Oh, surely? Not sure... Let's see, downloading and installing a third-party package (with unclear licensing). Learning to use it. No, thanks. May be next time. But you seem to agree with my main point -- Python's C API is wanting.
TCL's stubs are, indeed, weird. They (aim to) solve a problem, that does not always exist. However, TCL can be built without them. And, most importantly, they are not part of the API. Your C code is unaffected by the stubs -- only the linking procedure is.
On contrast, Python's C API generates warnings at compile time due to type misdeclarations (especially in function pointers). Another thing is the sheer size of the PyObj structure, which is ever growing from version to version. To initialize the field 15 in it, for example, you have to carefully assign 0s to 14 fields before that. So your C code is not as good...
While TCL remains my personal favorite, Python is really good, except for the creating-your-own-extensions part. The Python's C API needs a lot of catching up to do to match the excellence of TCL's.
The homeless guy entered your shed, because he had nowhere else to sleep. Adrian broke into networks to prove something, or to entertain himself or whatever -- something a lot less important than the physical need of shelter.
The point is that the guy stole nothing, he didn't dig through the boxes, he didn't walk off with the lawnmower, he didn't burn the place down.
Anyway, that homeless person put himself at your mercy. And you had enough of it (but not enough to just wake him up yourself, give him a sandwich and threaten to call police next time). Adrian was at the mercy of New York Times, which decided to "press the charges".
At worst what he did should be a misdemeanor.
Contact your lawmakers -- they write the laws, determining, what's a crime, what's a misdemeanor, and what's a civil offense. The laws also specify the maximum and minimum punishment and what a judge can and can not take into account (intention, actual damage, intended damage, potential damage, etc.).
It seems to me his only crime was to embarass a corporation.
This was not his crime -- there are no laws against that -- PETA does that every day, for example... He is accused (and admits to) breaking real law(s).
I sympathize with him, and hope for the least legal punishment, but something has to be done to him. And you should not renew your NYT subscription as a protest (or Boston Globe, or whatever paper of the huge family, part of which is NYT, you subscribe to).
And so does Unix -- if you listen to Windows zealots -- the 1970-ies technology...
TCL is really a pretty ugly language
Yes, and penguins are pretty ugly creatures. It is a matter of perception and -- as you mention -- partiality.
easy to embed in a C/C++ app, or you can use SWIG to wrap your C/C++ code for access from Ruby
SWIG can generate TCL wrappers (and Python, and Perl) just as well. TCL, however, was created to be embeddable. And its syntax allows for easy to understand application configuration files. Ruby may well be good, but that does not mean TCL is not.
Of course, Mars is more exciting. But practicly, exploring Antarctica is many orders of magnitude easier. The barren continent (a few penguins may be) may hold plenty of promise within a much easier reach...
Small (without the Tk part), multi-platform, truly interpretive, and created to be embeddable. From John Ousterhout's introduction to his book about his language:
Tcl was born of frustration. In the early 1980s my students and I developed a number of interactive tools at the University of California at Berkeley, mostly for integrated circuit design, and we found ourselves spending a lot of time building bad command languages. Each tool needed to have a command language of some sort, but our main interest was in the tool rather than its command language. We spent as little time as possible on the command language and always ended up with a language that was weak and quirky. Furthermore, the command language for one tool was never quite right for the next tool, so we ended up building a new bad command language for each tool. This became increasingly frustrating.
In the fall of 1987 it occurred to me that the solution was to build a reusable command language. If a general-purpose scripting language could be built as a C library package, then perhaps it could be reused for many different purposes in many different applications. Of course, the language would need to be extensible so that each application could add its own specific features to the core provided by the library. In the spring of 1988 I decided to implement such a language, and the result was Tcl.
What else do you need? Oh, and if you are still thinking of making your own -- keep rereading the first paragraph of the quote above, until the silly thought leaves your mind...
I think, it is the same right, that lets us domesticate and/or eat various fauna and flora on Earth. Some people don't think, we don't have such a right, but most think, we do.
... even when it is pointless. It would be tempting to blame the President and administration, which many love to hate, but they simply reflect the opinions of the electorate: "Do something!"
So they do. Confiscating box-cutters is pointless now -- they only worked once, because for years the "paradigm" for dealing with hijacking was: "obey all orders of the hijackers until landing". Now that we know, there may be no landing, the paradigm is different and the boxcutters (and scissors, and small knives) are useless to terrorists, as they will not help against the dozens of passengers with NOTHING TO LOSE.
The scumbags knew that -- all four attacks were timed to coincide, because such trick will only work once. Still, there are indications, the last attack failed, because the passengers have learned what they are facing.
But allowing to bring boxcutters on-board is politicly impossible with today's electorate and hence -- praise democracy -- the elected.
Slashdot Mirror
The US Army is part of a government. You don't present evidence to the contrary, so I'll tend to dismiss claims, that it can do anything a business can do "cheaper, faster, and better". A business can not fight a war, so you have to use the army. But if there is anything a business can do, it will do better.
Passionate references to "our boys" and condemnations of "profiteering corporations" seriously impair your credibility -- you seem to repeat someone else's propaganda. Troubles you have with your own words -- such as the misplaced reference to the overused term "food chain" -- make it apparent.
Of course, they have. Because we are afraid to back up our words with any claims of fact. The story reads like a piece of satire -- pointed, bitter, and funny. But its claim to be factual is greatly blunted, by reluctance to name the contracting company and the PC manufacturer involved.
What sheer stupidity! And "Insightful" no less...
Yea, we are all doomed, doomed! Unless we close the borders and stop importing things and services.
I, for one, welcome the chance the Indian workers get from this situation. However, your understanding of economics is too weak to seriously argue about the prospects for employment in different parts of the world economy."Globalization is the spice of life."
Ha! "If"... They do exist. And I'm glad the modern infrastructure is being hardened in response to this punks instead of remaining soft and collapsing from sudden hits by a truely hostile party (al'Qaeda, China, whatever).
They are like a vaccine, which causes the organism to develop anti-bodies, that will help fight real deceases.
Will this thing help me detect a strange metal object ahead of me -- like a trooper's car in the bushes? I'll be prepared to "overclock" it a little to gain this functionality...
So your true goal is advancing science (which -- technicaly -- can be done without human presence), but you think, that the only way to get popular support (hence -- Congress funding) is by fooling the masses into thinking, the human presence is needed or somehow useful?
Should not we be above such things?..
Did not happen on the Moon yet...
I thought, this missions should be about advancing science not bragging rights. But don't worry, US still holds the "national pride" record of Moon-landing, and, should a need to show-off arrive again (if Chinese land on the Moon, for example), our experience with robotic Mars missions will help us get an astronaut there first.
According to a recent Economist article (on "Bush's grand but costly visions"), NASA reckons, that adding a human to a space mission increases its cost ten-fold. Which means, we could've sent 10 (probably -- more, thanks to the economies of scale) instead of 2 rovers to Mars at half the price of a single manned mission.
Question:
While I'm sure, NASA's engineers are not "retarded", I have no information about their credentials. How do you know, they are among the greatest of our time?
Even if the individual engineers are, indeed, the best among living, another problem may well be with the organization. This is a government organization, after all... Even if all of the brightest techies and scientists dreamed of working for NASA, the brightest managers do not...
There is a difference between break-in-and-entry vs. just entry.
But it may be an invitation to take a peek inside. Which, in my opinion, more closely resembles what was done.
Better yet, how about I post my credit and medical histories on my mailbox by the entrance. Should I blame the passers-by when bits and pieces of my personal info are discussed in a local bar?
Accessing a network share may seem difficult (and thus more like a break-in) to a computer illiterate person, which is (partially) why the law-makers are all infuriated, but -- when the share is not password protected -- it really is aking to stopping by and reading a posting on a pole. There was no break-in...
Because it is not part of Python? I needed to access some functions from our own libraries and Python's C API seemed sufficient if imperfect. I did it, but was left with bad taste in my mouth.
Oh, surely? Not sure... Let's see, downloading and installing a third-party package (with unclear licensing). Learning to use it. No, thanks. May be next time. But you seem to agree with my main point -- Python's C API is wanting.
TCL's stubs are, indeed, weird. They (aim to) solve a problem, that does not always exist. However, TCL can be built without them. And, most importantly, they are not part of the API. Your C code is unaffected by the stubs -- only the linking procedure is.
On contrast, Python's C API generates warnings at compile time due to type misdeclarations (especially in function pointers). Another thing is the sheer size of the PyObj structure, which is ever growing from version to version. To initialize the field 15 in it, for example, you have to carefully assign 0s to 14 fields before that. So your C code is not as good...
While TCL remains my personal favorite, Python is really good, except for the creating-your-own-extensions part. The Python's C API needs a lot of catching up to do to match the excellence of TCL's.
I'd be satisfied not when pollution reaches zero, but simply when it becomes less than that of the currently used method(s).
What about getting off some other object? Moon? Mars?
Or do you propose, we build a space elevator on anything prior to landing there?
The homeless guy entered your shed, because he had nowhere else to sleep. Adrian broke into networks to prove something, or to entertain himself or whatever -- something a lot less important than the physical need of shelter.
Anyway, that homeless person put himself at your mercy. And you had enough of it (but not enough to just wake him up yourself, give him a sandwich and threaten to call police next time). Adrian was at the mercy of New York Times, which decided to "press the charges".
Contact your lawmakers -- they write the laws, determining, what's a crime, what's a misdemeanor, and what's a civil offense. The laws also specify the maximum and minimum punishment and what a judge can and can not take into account (intention, actual damage, intended damage, potential damage, etc.).
This was not his crime -- there are no laws against that -- PETA does that every day, for example... He is accused (and admits to) breaking real law(s).
I sympathize with him, and hope for the least legal punishment, but something has to be done to him. And you should not renew your NYT subscription as a protest (or Boston Globe, or whatever paper of the huge family, part of which is NYT, you subscribe to).
And so does Unix -- if you listen to Windows zealots -- the 1970-ies technology...
Yes, and penguins are pretty ugly creatures. It is a matter of perception and -- as you mention -- partiality.
SWIG can generate TCL wrappers (and Python, and Perl) just as well. TCL, however, was created to be embeddable. And its syntax allows for easy to understand application configuration files. Ruby may well be good, but that does not mean TCL is not.
Of course, Mars is more exciting. But practicly, exploring Antarctica is many orders of magnitude easier. The barren continent (a few penguins may be) may hold plenty of promise within a much easier reach...
Small (without the Tk part), multi-platform, truly interpretive, and created to be embeddable. From John Ousterhout's introduction to his book about his language:
What else do you need? Oh, and if you are still thinking of making your own -- keep rereading the first paragraph of the quote above, until the silly thought leaves your mind...
What happened to good old Pascals? -mi
I think, it is the same right, that lets us domesticate and/or eat various fauna and flora on Earth. Some people don't think, we don't have such a right, but most think, we do.
... even when it is pointless. It would be tempting to blame the President and administration, which many love to hate, but they simply reflect the opinions of the electorate: "Do something!"
So they do. Confiscating box-cutters is pointless now -- they only worked once, because for years the "paradigm" for dealing with hijacking was: "obey all orders of the hijackers until landing". Now that we know, there may be no landing, the paradigm is different and the boxcutters (and scissors, and small knives) are useless to terrorists, as they will not help against the dozens of passengers with NOTHING TO LOSE.
The scumbags knew that -- all four attacks were timed to coincide, because such trick will only work once. Still, there are indications, the last attack failed, because the passengers have learned what they are facing.
But allowing to bring boxcutters on-board is politicly impossible with today's electorate and hence -- praise democracy -- the elected.