What really hacks me off about the bad interfaces page is that sometimes the author does not understand the concept but ridicules it anyway. Two examples: (both off the error page)
One of them starts with the phrase: "We came across this informative error message in Microsoft's Visual Basic 5.0 recently." (Who's this 'we'? The author and his imaginary friend?)
The Visual Basic help page told him:
The specified error number is returned by the system or external component (usually from an Application Interface call) and is displayed in hexadecimal and decimal format.
He translates this to:
Something bad happened. We don't know what it was or what caused it. All we do know is that the hexadecimal number you see is a hexadecimal number, but the number itself is meaningless.
No, the number is not meaningless, and yes, you can find out what caused it, if you had the brain cells needed to understand the concept of a return value!
That's bad enough; then there's this one, starts with the phrase "Is it any wonder that many people consider programmers to be geeks?":
The error message reads:
There has been an error transferring your mail. I said:
MAIL FROM: (address) And then the SMTP server said: 503 Polite people say HELO first.
Now, I will be the first to admit that this isn't the clearest error message in the world. For instance: "Error code 503: Polite people begin transmission with HELO" might have worked better. However, the author proves his utter lack of clue with his response.
the Eudora programmer... improperly chose to frame the message in the context of a dialog between the two machines
HELO! That's exactly what it IS! It's a dialogue between the machines to set up the connection, that one of them screwed up! Also, how exactly do you say that error message without somehow touching on the concept that the two machines are sending messages back and forth?!
Not satisifed with this, the author goes on to mock and ridicule the person who wrote the code:
We
There's that 'we' again. Maybe it's the Royal We.
have no difficulty imagining the programmer sharing the resultant message to his programming friends, snickering ala Beavis and Butthead at his keen sense of humor. We'd suggest that he take a day off from the computer, and go out and interact with a few non-programming-type individuals.
#1, Google and see if someone else has already worked on the algorithm. "Nothing new under the sun".
#2, if that gives you no results, post the code or at least pseudo-code so we can comment. Not "I have a new miracle development that could be revolutionary; please comment on it with no clue as to exactly what it is or how it works."
#3, talk to a CS professor. You should know plenty of them.
Who would dare vote against something called the "USA Patriot act"? Imagine what would happen come election time:
"Senator Sensible voted/against/ the USA Patriot act to defend you and your families. Senator Sensible voted/against/ the war on Iraq to safeguard this country. Senator Sensible voted/against/ the CBDTPA to improve the quality of your Internet experience and bring digital television to your living room. We want this godless unAmerican traitor shot or deported. We'll settle for voting him out of office. VOTE SENATOR PARTYLINE."
Face it people, democracy is about swaying the masses and doing what's popular - not what's right.
programs were written in the optimal way, that is, as highly portable as possible
I disagree that optimal == portable, but...
wouldn't it simply be a matter of including seperate versions of the machine specific code and then having everything else just recompile to the appropriate version during install
a) There's no such thing as "machine specific code" and then an "everything else". At the ASM level, EVERYTHING is architechture specific.
b) And what architechture do we write this magical installer for?
You see the problem, I hope. Personally, I think IHBT by the parent.:P
The average Windows user doesn't know that anything else exists.
But Mac users, on the other hand,... know what their OS is and why they like it.
So you're saying that Windows users are ignorant while Macintosh users are well informed...
[Mac users] have used PCs in public labs, at school, libraries, whatever for years and will be able to see through the the Microsoft FUD as they have been doing for years.
And well experienced. Think again. I've used Macs in various settings (school, work, play, ex's), and I still can pick Windows over Mac. You're just spouting "Anyone who disagrees with my choice is underinformed." - not a valid debate tactic.
Mac users need to get over themselves - the job that Apple's OS people face is much easier than faced by Redmond's.
Neal Stephanson said it better than I ever could:
It is hard enough to make an OS that works well on one specific piece of hardware, designed and tested by engineers who work down the hallway from you, in the same company. Making an OS to work on arbitrary pieces of hardware, cranked out by rabidly entrepeneurial clonemakers on the other side of the International Date Line, is very difficult, and accounts for much of the troubles people have using Windows.
What we need is an end-to-end encryption standard that provides true anonymity. I.e. something that ensures that a 3rd party can't "sniff" packets and link IP addresses to their source.
How is this possible without in effect telling every router "You don't know where it's going, but get it there." or having some 'trusted' router where the 'public' IP is recast into the private - with the obvious problems there.
Why would anyone bother overclocking with today's processors? The clock increase gained by it will be surpassed in a few weeks by a new processor release anyway, which is a testament to how ineffective it is these days.
You're ignoring the money factor. It's not a matter of "let's push a brand new bleeding edge chip to a speed they won't match for 'a few weeks'", it's a matter of "let's buy a slightly older chip which can be clocked up to better performance and save some money which can then go to a better video card/faster hard drive etc."
My main question about this article is how they plan to warranty a system that they encourage overclocking on...
Smaller networks are only better where your channel is a small, mostly static, group of regulars - if you rely on randoms popping in, sad to say, you won't get many on a smaller network.
AFAIK, on most servers if an e-mail address doesn't exist, a message gets sent back that an error occured because the user doesn't exist. What more validation does a Spammer need of an e-mail address?
For one thing, spammers often email every address in a domain (especially ones such as aol.com), I wouldn't put it past them to discard any return mail containing error messages.
That also assumes that they're using a valid return address that the server can use to return such errors.
Finally, the remote img trick doesn't just let the spammer know that the mail address was good, it lets the spammer know that the mail was opened.
What I fear is one choice for Windows and one choice for 80x86 UNIX - that's what UnitedLinux represents. Then it's the Microsoft/Apple wars without the hardware difference. Even if they manage to coexist, UnitedLinux would become like Microsoft - the only choice for a particular OS on a particular hardware. And as the old wise man said, one choice is no choice.
"And now at last it comes. You will give me a monopoly freely! In place of the Dark Lord of Redmond, you will set up a Penguin! And I shall not be dark, but beautiful and terrible as the Morning and the Night! Fair as the Sea and the Sun and the Snow upon the Mountain! Dreadful as the Storm and the Lightning! Stabler than the foundations of the earth! All shall love me and despair!"
Fear one choice which is really no choice. Fear setting up a second monolithic company. Competition good, biodiversity good, stagnation bad.
Or do you want to one day have this conversation:
"Which OS should I install, Windows XP 3 or United Linux 4.5 (with Konquering Gnome Desktop Interface)?"
"Doesn't matter. They look the same, they read each others' files, they're your only choices, and they both suck."
You forgot "You agree to give this product complete, unmonitored, unrestricted access to the internet to connect on arbitary ports to others' servers and download, install, and run any code it may see fit to."
shareware-ish, for dos, vga graphics (or maybe even svga), nasty (it would move the bottom of the play field up or randomly add blocks, you could buy weapons like bombs or snake stoppers...
You email the secretary (ok, administrative assistant) to have a mocha ready for you when the meeting ends because it's a boring meeting and your about to fall asleep.
If your internal mail is on Yahoo, you've got more problems than the wrong caffeinated drink.
Slashdot Mirror
One of them starts with the phrase: "We came across this informative error message in Microsoft's Visual Basic 5.0 recently." (Who's this 'we'? The author and his imaginary friend?)
The Visual Basic help page told him:
He translates this to:
No, the number is not meaningless, and yes, you can find out what caused it, if you had the brain cells needed to understand the concept of a return value!
That's bad enough; then there's this one, starts with the phrase "Is it any wonder that many people consider programmers to be geeks?":
The error message reads:
Now, I will be the first to admit that this isn't the clearest error message in the world. For instance: "Error code 503: Polite people begin transmission with HELO" might have worked better. However, the author proves his utter lack of clue with his response.
HELO! That's exactly what it IS! It's a dialogue between the machines to set up the connection, that one of them screwed up! Also, how exactly do you say that error message without somehow touching on the concept that the two machines are sending messages back and forth?!
Not satisifed with this, the author goes on to mock and ridicule the person who wrote the code:
There's that 'we' again. Maybe it's the Royal We.
*fume*. I simply cannot comment on this.
KTEH here (SF Bay Area) ran Eva a couple years back. Uncut. Subbed.
#1, Google and see if someone else has already worked on the algorithm. "Nothing new under the sun".
- demo.html.
#2, if that gives you no results, post the code or at least pseudo-code so we can comment. Not "I have a new miracle development that could be revolutionary; please comment on it with no clue as to exactly what it is or how it works."
#3, talk to a CS professor. You should know plenty of them.
And the obligatory link - http://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/harrison/Java/sorting
Who would dare vote against something called the "USA Patriot act"? Imagine what would happen come election time:
/against/ the USA Patriot act to defend you and your families. Senator Sensible voted /against/ the war on Iraq to safeguard this country. Senator Sensible voted /against/ the CBDTPA to improve the quality of your Internet experience and bring digital television to your living room. We want this godless unAmerican traitor shot or deported. We'll settle for voting him out of office. VOTE SENATOR PARTYLINE."
"Senator Sensible voted
Face it people, democracy is about swaying the masses and doing what's popular - not what's right.
The conversion rate is $1 == 1.02
So it's fairly close.
Sure. It's called an open plan office.
I disagree that optimal == portable, but...
a) There's no such thing as "machine specific code" and then an "everything else". At the ASM level, EVERYTHING is architechture specific.
b) And what architechture do we write this magical installer for?
You see the problem, I hope. Personally, I think IHBT by the parent.
So you're saying that Windows users are ignorant while Macintosh users are well informed...
And well experienced. Think again. I've used Macs in various settings (school, work, play, ex's), and I still can pick Windows over Mac. You're just spouting "Anyone who disagrees with my choice is underinformed." - not a valid debate tactic.
Mac users need to get over themselves - the job that Apple's OS people face is much easier than faced by Redmond's.
Neal Stephanson said it better than I ever could:
Possibly because Apple makes money on the hardware anyway?
The first thing that came to mind was:
Linux Chicken(s): Engineer chickens who are sick of walking build themselves an overpass/slidewalk, and generously open it up to everyone.
The next was:
"Gee, I wish I could use the phrase 'Looks like a chicken, clucks like a chicken, actually a duck what forgot how to fly.'" Any ideas?
*boggle*. You do realize this will triple the size of the distro for ALL users, not just those who are installing across multiple architechtures?
In fact, I'm not even sure it's possible to write a "universal install"...
How is this possible without in effect telling every router "You don't know where it's going, but get it there." or having some 'trusted' router where the 'public' IP is recast into the private - with the obvious problems there.
You forgot 'shoot it'.
Paraphrased, "Even a computer that plays chess doesn't have the brains to run from a fire."
(see the lyrics to "Kasparov vs. Deep Blue" off Moxy Früvous' album Live Noise.)
Depends on your definition of "old". FWIW, the two oldest procs I own (K6-2/300 and P3M-1ghz) are *not* OCed and the newest (P41.6@2.4) *is*.
You're ignoring the money factor. It's not a matter of "let's push a brand new bleeding edge chip to a speed they won't match for 'a few weeks'", it's a matter of "let's buy a slightly older chip which can be clocked up to better performance and save some money which can then go to a better video card/faster hard drive etc."
My main question about this article is how they plan to warranty a system that they encourage overclocking on...
Posted this anon on accident.
I know someone who unplugged a hd while the computer was powered up and running windows.
No, it *wasn't* meant to be hot swappable.
And all he did was fry a fuse in his PSU. TANJ.
"God protects fools, children, and the cataclysmically stoned."
For one thing, spammers often email every address in a domain (especially ones such as aol.com), I wouldn't put it past them to discard any return mail containing error messages.
That also assumes that they're using a valid return address that the server can use to return such errors.
Finally, the remote img trick doesn't just let the spammer know that the mail address was good, it lets the spammer know that the mail was opened.
Apple gets to be a monopoly, since they make the hardware as well as the software.
Or are you going to claim next that TI holds a monopoly over TI calculators?
What I fear is one choice for Windows and one choice for 80x86 UNIX - that's what UnitedLinux represents. Then it's the Microsoft/Apple wars without the hardware difference. Even if they manage to coexist, UnitedLinux would become like Microsoft - the only choice for a particular OS on a particular hardware. And as the old wise man said, one choice is no choice.
"And now at last it comes. You will give me a monopoly freely! In place of the Dark Lord of Redmond, you will set up a Penguin! And I shall not be dark, but beautiful and terrible as the Morning and the Night! Fair as the Sea and the Sun and the Snow upon the Mountain! Dreadful as the Storm and the Lightning! Stabler than the foundations of the earth! All shall love me and despair!"
Fear one choice which is really no choice. Fear setting up a second monolithic company. Competition good, biodiversity good, stagnation bad.
Or do you want to one day have this conversation:
"Which OS should I install, Windows XP 3 or United Linux 4.5 (with Konquering Gnome Desktop Interface)?"
"Doesn't matter. They look the same, they read each others' files, they're your only choices, and they both suck."
You forgot "You agree to give this product complete, unmonitored, unrestricted access to the internet to connect on arbitary ports to others' servers and download, install, and run any code it may see fit to."
shareware-ish, for dos, vga graphics (or maybe even svga), nasty (it would move the bottom of the play field up or randomly add blocks, you could buy weapons like bombs or snake stoppers...
does anyone else remember this?
Yup, attbi does that too. Wonder if a lawsuit for false advertising is in order...