Although there is truth behind what you say you have the reasoning wrong. Models on other planets allow us more than one point of data for atmospheric study, and do thus allow for better understandings.
It's not about testing the model, it's about trying to make it work at all.
Oh sure, at the rate of power requirements decreasing, processing increasing and solar panels improving I'd say we'll be there in 5-10 years (tablets if not laptops).
But the (GP at this point?) was right that for current devices a solar cell on the back or behind the LCD would neither collect nearly enough energy to make it worth while. Just like you can't solar power one of those beastly accountants calculators with the giant whos-your-daddy motor. You can make a version that works from solar, but you can't (meaningfully) solar power the old model.
I figure within 3-4 years we'll have working colour e-ink, and intel is already working on chips that are powered from very modest solar arrays... solar powered tablets won't be far behind, with laptops coming not too long after.
Lies, well actually truths. You're quite right on all points but one:
If you could *actually* pull a steady 5W from solar cells behind an LCD screen it would be entirely worth it. It would extend the battery life a considerable amount.
In reality it'd probably drop well below 1W and then you're quite right it's not worth bothering.
Sure I follow, but you're still talking about just a wildly over simplified arrangement.
Real programming involves threads and memory allocations, access levels and hardware interaction. How would you go about creating a live feedback system like he did for programming a VM? Keeping in mind that it has to be equally applicable to a full 3D game (client and server), a point of sale system and professional image (and video!) manipulation software.
There just isn't a way to meaningfully generalize a fancy visualization for code. Either the code is so simple that you don't need it to start with, or it's complex enough that trying to generalize a visualization will take you a billion times longer than just designing it in the first place.
The game stuff is a great play-testing tool, but that stuff has existed for ages; it's nothing new. There just isn't any overlap with actual programming.
I would be in shear ecstasy if someone proves me wrong about this and writes a wonderful, generic, useful tool that actually simplifies interacting with complex programs. But it isn't going to happen, at least not until a major breakthrough in computing comes about (hard AI, readily available quantum computing, something else I can't fathom)...
The few marginally serious contributors I know have attributed that attitude to two things (they mostly have the same attitude whether they'll admit it or not).
1) They feel that proper (G)UI design as well as documentation and otherwise slows down coding. That's not even really wrong in a technical sense, but holy hell is it wrong in every other sense.
2) They don't want someone coming in after they've done all the "hard work" and telling them that something should really behave differently because it would be more user friendly.
It's a bad attitude, it's a common attitude among programmers, I even catch myself thinking that way once in a while.
I suspect it will always be a bane of OSS, because the buck starts and stops with programmers and we're generally an egotistical and stubborn lot.
Actually, many hirers like to see a service position on a resume. I get the point you're making but that's actually kind of a lousy example.
If you worked at a fast food place for more than six months, or went back two summers (showing that they actually wanted you to come back) it means you can eat shit and grin*. Whether that came from the public or your manager or both, it's something many people who hire like seeing.
*Not that they'll necessarily put that to the test in the position you're applying for, but being able to put up with somewhat hostile environments without flipping out is a plus
It's because so few people use versioning systems as versioning systems. Many use it as a method for control first and everything else a distant second.
Not that there's anything wrong with exerting control over a repository, it's just silly that it tends to come at the cost of actually using the functionality of a repository.
I just wanted to point out that the issue here is that christians, and in fact most (north american) religious people, strongly believe that it is their right and duty to shove their invisible sky-friends down your throat.
There *is* a war on christianity, because it has set itself up such that everything sane is an attack against it.
While I agree there should be a distinction made (just as I detest the term 3D for stereoscopic image) this tech is entirely different than the 3DS.
This would theoretically allow for a movie theatre full of people to each be broadcast their own version of the movie with the correct perspective point thereby making stereoscopic *almost* worthy of the 3D moniker.
So while it should be called "multi-perspective glasses-free stereoscopic display" the simple fact is you're rant is completely unwarranted, the tech in your 3DS is useless for everything but the 3DS (maybe laptops)
Although true I think most of the voting is powered by union leaders and "special interest" groups, they point the minions in the right direction. All I was suggesting is that the effect would get even more pronounced and further drown out any hope of sensible, informed voters rising above the noise.
For the record, I think that ship has long since sailed... but I don't advocate making the problem even worse.
$10 isn't enough to get people to take an hour to go to a polling outpost and vote. It has been proven time and time again to be enough to have people fill out an online form.
If it only ever replaced the absentee/mail-in this would be a non-issue, but that system works perfectly well without spending billions of dollars on it.
Oh yes, it's not laziness it's apathy... forgive me for not using your preferred term which in this context is all but identical.
It's not different from the existing system for mail-in and absentee votes that works perfectly well and won't cost billions trying to secure. I can't imagine what my problem with replacing a perfectly functional system with one that is no better (possibly worse) at a huge cost would be...
Let's be honest though, if you're too lazy to vote you're too lazy to form an opinion on who to vote for. The numbers would inflate and the best case scenario is that each existing interest would be able to lure in a proportionate number of the new voters.
You're quite right on that front, but if we are talking about it as strictly a replacement for postal voting I have different non-technical problems with it (namely cost).
While the pilot test (the one that didn't happen due to the hacking) was intended for a postal replacement there was no question that the eye was on extending it for general use.
There will come a time when the postal system no longer exists and e-voting will be the way to go even just as a replacement for that. I'd say that day is no earlier than 15 years from now.
I was going to suggest the less sinister issue with it, although along the same vein.
If all you have to do is log in and vote from your computer, a small "incentive" could seriously increase the voter turn out. Of course I'm referring to the incentive being provided by a company/party.
Right now, laziness is keeping the vast majority of uninformed dolts away from the ballot boxes. Utter hatred is keeping some informed ones home too but that's a different issue.
They are one and the same. My code is eventually going to do what I set out for it to do unless someone changes the project or scraps it.
What he talks about in the video is "exploring" code, even in the binary search stuff he actually uses the phrase "So I've kinda got a feeling for what this algorithm does now"
It's backwards, you decide what you want and then you build it.
A design tool? sure, he's nailed it. A programming tool? not a fucking chance.
Slashdot Mirror
I actually *prefer* to give out my phone number rather than my email address.
I'd rather have a missed call than spam in my email account.
Yeah, but it doesn't work on Earth either.
Although there is truth behind what you say you have the reasoning wrong. Models on other planets allow us more than one point of data for atmospheric study, and do thus allow for better understandings.
It's not about testing the model, it's about trying to make it work at all.
Well *one* of us certainly should do some googling before we make an ass of ourselves.
But it isn't me
Oh sure, at the rate of power requirements decreasing, processing increasing and solar panels improving I'd say we'll be there in 5-10 years (tablets if not laptops).
But the (GP at this point?) was right that for current devices a solar cell on the back or behind the LCD would neither collect nearly enough energy to make it worth while. Just like you can't solar power one of those beastly accountants calculators with the giant whos-your-daddy motor. You can make a version that works from solar, but you can't (meaningfully) solar power the old model.
I figure within 3-4 years we'll have working colour e-ink, and intel is already working on chips that are powered from very modest solar arrays... solar powered tablets won't be far behind, with laptops coming not too long after.
You need to read entire conversations before replying out of context to a different reply.
Or just keep sounding foolish, up to you.
Lies, well actually truths. You're quite right on all points but one:
If you could *actually* pull a steady 5W from solar cells behind an LCD screen it would be entirely worth it. It would extend the battery life a considerable amount.
In reality it'd probably drop well below 1W and then you're quite right it's not worth bothering.
Sure I follow, but you're still talking about just a wildly over simplified arrangement.
Real programming involves threads and memory allocations, access levels and hardware interaction. How would you go about creating a live feedback system like he did for programming a VM? Keeping in mind that it has to be equally applicable to a full 3D game (client and server), a point of sale system and professional image (and video!) manipulation software.
There just isn't a way to meaningfully generalize a fancy visualization for code. Either the code is so simple that you don't need it to start with, or it's complex enough that trying to generalize a visualization will take you a billion times longer than just designing it in the first place.
The game stuff is a great play-testing tool, but that stuff has existed for ages; it's nothing new. There just isn't any overlap with actual programming.
I would be in shear ecstasy if someone proves me wrong about this and writes a wonderful, generic, useful tool that actually simplifies interacting with complex programs. But it isn't going to happen, at least not until a major breakthrough in computing comes about (hard AI, readily available quantum computing, something else I can't fathom)...
And you're too stupid to understand that design and programming are separate things.
You think engineers tweak bridge plans as they're going just to see how it works out?
Fucking retard.
No, that's just it... There *doesn't* have to be a way to generalize.
If there were a way to generalize complex code none of us would have a job.
The few marginally serious contributors I know have attributed that attitude to two things (they mostly have the same attitude whether they'll admit it or not).
1) They feel that proper (G)UI design as well as documentation and otherwise slows down coding. That's not even really wrong in a technical sense, but holy hell is it wrong in every other sense.
2) They don't want someone coming in after they've done all the "hard work" and telling them that something should really behave differently because it would be more user friendly.
It's a bad attitude, it's a common attitude among programmers, I even catch myself thinking that way once in a while.
I suspect it will always be a bane of OSS, because the buck starts and stops with programmers and we're generally an egotistical and stubborn lot.
Actually, many hirers like to see a service position on a resume. I get the point you're making but that's actually kind of a lousy example.
If you worked at a fast food place for more than six months, or went back two summers (showing that they actually wanted you to come back) it means you can eat shit and grin*. Whether that came from the public or your manager or both, it's something many people who hire like seeing.
*Not that they'll necessarily put that to the test in the position you're applying for, but being able to put up with somewhat hostile environments without flipping out is a plus
It's because so few people use versioning systems as versioning systems. Many use it as a method for control first and everything else a distant second.
Not that there's anything wrong with exerting control over a repository, it's just silly that it tends to come at the cost of actually using the functionality of a repository.
You're absolutely right on every point.
I just wanted to point out that the issue here is that christians, and in fact most (north american) religious people, strongly believe that it is their right and duty to shove their invisible sky-friends down your throat.
There *is* a war on christianity, because it has set itself up such that everything sane is an attack against it.
While I agree there should be a distinction made (just as I detest the term 3D for stereoscopic image) this tech is entirely different than the 3DS.
This would theoretically allow for a movie theatre full of people to each be broadcast their own version of the movie with the correct perspective point thereby making stereoscopic *almost* worthy of the 3D moniker.
So while it should be called "multi-perspective glasses-free stereoscopic display" the simple fact is you're rant is completely unwarranted, the tech in your 3DS is useless for everything but the 3DS (maybe laptops)
heh heh
Although true I think most of the voting is powered by union leaders and "special interest" groups, they point the minions in the right direction. All I was suggesting is that the effect would get even more pronounced and further drown out any hope of sensible, informed voters rising above the noise.
For the record, I think that ship has long since sailed... but I don't advocate making the problem even worse.
You need to think before posting.
$10 isn't enough to get people to take an hour to go to a polling outpost and vote. It has been proven time and time again to be enough to have people fill out an online form.
If it only ever replaced the absentee/mail-in this would be a non-issue, but that system works perfectly well without spending billions of dollars on it.
Oh yes, it's not laziness it's apathy... forgive me for not using your preferred term which in this context is all but identical.
It's not different from the existing system for mail-in and absentee votes that works perfectly well and won't cost billions trying to secure. I can't imagine what my problem with replacing a perfectly functional system with one that is no better (possibly worse) at a huge cost would be...
I'm not one of them, I always vote. But to be perfectly frank spoiled ballots count about as much as the smiley face on a kindergarten assignment.
I didn't say it was a good system....
Let's be honest though, if you're too lazy to vote you're too lazy to form an opinion on who to vote for. The numbers would inflate and the best case scenario is that each existing interest would be able to lure in a proportionate number of the new voters.
Yeah, you need to actually think before you post.
How are you getting them the codes? Telepathy?
I think maybe you should lead with the cancer treatment next time.
You're quite right on that front, but if we are talking about it as strictly a replacement for postal voting I have different non-technical problems with it (namely cost).
While the pilot test (the one that didn't happen due to the hacking) was intended for a postal replacement there was no question that the eye was on extending it for general use.
There will come a time when the postal system no longer exists and e-voting will be the way to go even just as a replacement for that. I'd say that day is no earlier than 15 years from now.
He's talking about someone *standing over their shoulder*
How is that a technical problem?
How about having them log in and then voting for them? How is that a technical problem?
I was going to suggest the less sinister issue with it, although along the same vein.
If all you have to do is log in and vote from your computer, a small "incentive" could seriously increase the voter turn out. Of course I'm referring to the incentive being provided by a company/party.
Right now, laziness is keeping the vast majority of uninformed dolts away from the ballot boxes. Utter hatred is keeping some informed ones home too but that's a different issue.
They are one and the same. My code is eventually going to do what I set out for it to do unless someone changes the project or scraps it.
What he talks about in the video is "exploring" code, even in the binary search stuff he actually uses the phrase "So I've kinda got a feeling for what this algorithm does now"
It's backwards, you decide what you want and then you build it.
A design tool? sure, he's nailed it. A programming tool? not a fucking chance.