Unfortunately this is a great way to have to learn two languages (HaXe and Javascript) instead of one. I believe browser support for "source-level" operations (debugging, profiling, etc) for compile-to-JS languages will come some day, but that day is not today.
And why do you place no value on these things? They all seem like pretty important things to contribute to a good user experience. Kudos to MS for inventing them.
Unless of course, MS did not invent them. But then you should be able to show prior art and get the patents invalidated.
I think most people agree that a nuclear plant can be operated safely, with a much lower environmental impact over its lifetime than a similar output "traditional" (coal/gas) power plant.
Where I think some are naive is in estimating the potential for human nature to do the things necessary to operate a nuclear plant safely for its lifetime. The problem is that most of the things required for safety (regular maintenance, proper decommissioning, technology upgrades) are high costs whose benefits do not show up immediately (or perhaps, ever) on the balance sheet. This means that no matter how well-intentioned a nuclear plant owner is at the outset, there is a chance that they will not do these things. Once an upgrade is skipped and there is no consequence, the next upgrade is even more costly, and even more likely to be skipped.
One solution to this might be more regulation, to try to force the companies to work toward goals other than the bottom line. Unfortunately, government changes over time and sometimes is clearly in the pocket of corporations rather than the public good. Assuming that you could prevent this from happening for a century or more is not realistic.
I could fault the owners of these plants for not having a perfectly spotless record of safety improvements and maintenance, or the government for failing to hold the companies to a high enough standard. But honestly, we should know better than to put our faith in any system that is inherently unstable, requires continuous inflows of money and manpower to remain safe, has an operational lifetime that spans generations, and has a large decommissioning cost.
If I have to wear glasses anyway, why not put LCDs in the glasses themselves? You'd get a full edge-to-edge experience, avoiding some of the weird off-screen 3D effects. You'd always be in the "sweet spot", avoiding the off-center weird geometry effects. You could go 120Hz on both eyes and make the correct matching frames appear at exactly the same time, avoiding the headache-inducing strobe effect. You would not have ghosting or other distortion caused by trying to use the same display surface for two independent images.
I am cautiously optimistic about 3D as a whole, but I don't understand why I need to buy into the 3D TV paradigm in order to get a 3D experience. I would prefer to simply use active-screen glasses.
If I have to wear glasses anyway, why not put LCDs in the glasses themselves? You'd get a full edge-to-edge experience, avoiding some of the weird off-screen 3D effects. You'd always be in the "sweet spot", avoiding the off-center weird geometry effects. You could go 120Hz on both eyes and make the correct matching frames appear at exactly the same time, avoiding the headache-inducing strobe effect. You would not have ghosting or other distortion caused by trying to use the same display surface for two independent images.
I am cautiously optimistic about 3D as a whole, but I don't understand why I need to buy into the 3D TV paradigm in order to get a 3D experience. I would prefer to simply use active-screen glasses.
Unlike some here, I actually find the extension valuable and wish to have it active. I am quite annoyed that Firefox decided to block it without giving me any choice in the matter.
BTW I understand that my own frustration at having this blocked without consent is similar to the frustration of those who wish not to have the extension but had it given to them without consent. That does not excuse either party. As a user I am now bearing the brunt of this petty squabble between MS and FF.
I tried out VS2010 and found it to have some nice improvements; though nothing earth-shattering for me personally, it has some little things that are nice-to-have, and I can see how those things would improve productivity. But I had such severe performance problems I had to give up using it.
In a solution with 12 C# projects and 3 C++ projects, compiling takes around 5 minutes (took under a minute with VS2008) and hangs the UI completely for nearly the entire time. It also seems to not honor dependencies quite right, because compiling a second time with changes in only one project without downstream dependencies still takes nearly as long.
I sincerely hope Microsoft invests some more effort in the performance side of things prior to RTM, if they do, I'll be happy to upgrade.
Xbox 360 with 120gb drive (Elite) and wireless adapter: $400 Extra controller - $40 Amazon Charging kit - $17 Amazon Memory card (absolutely not necessary BTW) - $43 Amazon
I refuse to include headphones as you need them whether you use a PC or a console, therefore it is not relevant to your argument.
The total is $457, or $500 if you truly must have the memory card. You'll be able to play every Xbox 360 game without worrying about whether it is compatible. The graphics will look great and have an excellent framerate, having been fine-tuned for the Xbox capabilities. You'll never have a driver incompatibility. You'll never have a virus (hopefully I'll never have to eat these words!). You'll be able to play on your TV, which in most cases is larger and easier on the eyes than your computer monitor, that was designed for high-contrast stuff like word processing. You'll be able to play in the comfort of your couch, which in most cases is more comfortable than your office chair, that is designed for upright posture and typing.
You will be hard-pressed to find a $500 PC that can play 1 year old games, let alone the newest ones. And during the 5 year lifespan of a console, you will spend many times that amount trying to keep your PC upgraded to the latest video card.
charging a fee for this is a cheap profit-grab Perhaps you missed the part of my message which explained why this costs money. It's not just a one-time signature issuance. Every time the signature is verified, the trust authority comes into play. The infrastructure to handle millions of signature verifications costs money. When a company has costs, it generally passes those costs on to its customers. Who ever said everything in life has to be free?
if Microsoft were smart they would either offer this service for a nominal fee Is $100 per year not a nominal fee? That's less than $10 per month. And frankly I'd rather pay that money to VeriSign (or one of the other independent companies) than Microsoft. Be honest- you would never trust Microsoft with your signature verification either.
Vista verifies the signature automatically, and I (as a developer) wish that every OS did the same. It's not about free software developers OR commercial developers, it is about the security of the system which transports software from a developer to the end user. It also has absolutely nothing to do with Microsoft, other than the fact that they are at the forefront of enforcing this security.
Perhaps you place no value in security. That is the only way you can make the claim that you value code signatures (and signature verification) at $0.
Considering that this is 2/3 as much ($8bn vs $12bn) you could scale down and say that if this were presented as packages of $100 bills, it would weigh approximately (363*2/3) = 242 tons.
It's somewhat annoying to measure cash in "tons of $100 bills" and to think that none of it going to me;(
You appear not to understand what signing is, how it works, or why it is important.
It is not a tax on legitimate software developers. It is a way for any user to ensure that they are getting software from the source that they think they are getting it from.
A signature does not guarantee that you are not getting a trojan, or that the software has any sort of quality at all. The only thing it guarantees is that party A cannot send you software that claims to be from party B. The expectation is that certain developers/companies/people will have some reputation which users trust, and the signature makes sure that nobody else can harm that reputation by pretending to be the trusted party.
The first time people start getting signed trojans, they will immediately lose trust in the party who signed it. Users could still elect to install software from that company but based on reputation, they should expect trojans.
To verify signatures and support signature revocation in case the key is stolen, keys need to be regularly checked against a trusted third party (like Verisign). So that third party has a continual bandwidth and infrastructure cost. The cost of the signature is to offset that cost (and of course, make money too) but the cost is tiny compared to the value of reputation.
Saying "everyone else manages without it" is like saying "I've never been robbed before, and none of my friends have been robbed before, therefore there is no need for door locks." It's naive. If you are a developer, it will take only one instance of someone distributing a trojan in your name before you come to value a signature validation service.
Boehm's gc is far better than nothing. But comparing a kludgy hack in a language with non-typed pointers, to a language and runtime designed from the ground up for garbage collection, is laughable.
Come back when you understand heap compaction, generational garbage collection, and the difference between references (which are typesafe, tightly controlled, and known by the runtime) and pointers.
modern cars that can go 100,000 miles with *no service* -- not even oil changes
Please, god, don't let me ever buy a used car after you've owned it.
There has never been any automobile capable of such a feat. The best you will find are a rare few which, if driven carefully, can go 15,000 miles per oil change.
Read your owner's manual. Almost all cars require an oil change every 5,000 miles, unless they use pure synthetic; and those usually require an oil change after 7,500-10,000 miles.
I had that exact phone, with the same problem. I solved it by fashioning a paper clip into a hoop, slightly larger than the button. Then I super-glued the hoop around the button, thus creating a raised lip around the button. The result was that pushing the button against a flat surface (like the inside of my pocket) could not push the button, but a rounded surface (such as the end of a finger) could easily push it. A little black modelers paint and it looked like it should have always been designed like that.
BTW, Samsung did not learn their lesson for quite a while. My wife's Samsung phone, two generations later than the one I had, was unlocked by pressing either a sequence of keys under the flip, or holding down a single button on the side - not covered by the flip. Neither I nor she have purchased any Samsung product since.
Although it claims to be "The five best game console controllers of all time", it is more like, "Five inflential or important controllers except the Wii". You cannot argue that these are the best controllers. Every aspect of most of these have already been improved upon.
You know what everyone says about opinions, but here's mine. The 5 best controllers of all time:
5. Nintendo Wavebird. A little quirky and heavy but totally usable. Beats the hell out of an Atari 2600 joystick, that's for sure.
4. PS2 Dualshock. A bit too small to be rated higher - the 360's controller is much more comfortable to hold. But the overall feel is much better than any controller to come before it. The PS3's controller is a downgrade, with no rumble ability and a quirky roll sensor.
3. Guitar Hero guitar. This controller is specialized but it has a fantastic feel, takes major abuse and keeps working perfectly (millions of strums!) and just looks damn cool. It is a visceral experience, the controller helps with the suspension of disbelief that really helps you get into the game and feel like a real guitar player.
2. XBox 360 controller. What more can be said about this. It's one great-feeling, easy-to-use controller. For playing traditional games, there is none better.
1. Wii controller (nunchuck + remote). Redefines video game control. Nobody can argue that this won't have a profound effect on future console design. Sucks for traditional games, but in 10 years, will anyone remember that?
Ultima. 1-7 (including 7 pt.2) got progressively better, until finally reaching what I consider one of the best RPGs of all time. 8 was a letdown, 9 was a nightmare, X was cancelled. Killed by EA in order to focus on Ultima Online.
Perhaps v1 of the system could have a max speed of 20mph while under computer control. That would make it much less likely to be fatal if there were any problems, and yet still fast enough for short commutes. I know I'd be just as happy traveling to work at 20 mph, if I could gain the benefit of not having to do the driving myself.
As the bugs are worked out and the confidence in the system improves, the top speed could be raised.
Only real problem with this system is that you would have to have "auto-drive" lanes so that manual-drive, faster-moving cars wouldn't cause accidents. Not too bad of a problem though since its the same as our HOV lanes now.
(*) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
Although others have suggested a whitelist for legitimate bulk email, I propose that there is no legitimate bulk email.
Why do mailing lists exist anymore? Any valid use of a mailing list is better as an online forum (Slashcode is a great example, and so is Phorum). Add an RSS feed or some other polling client and you have timely notification of new posts. Plus you can have moderators, thread grouping always happens properly, there are excellent search capabilities, and achives can be browsed much more easily.
I'm sure someone would be happy to code up a client that brings new posts into/var/spool/mail (or Archive.pst if you are on Windows) directly, thus bypassing any hashcash calculation, and intercepts outgoing email to a given address & posts it on the board automatically, if you really must have an email gateway to the discussion.
I'm a C (and C-like languages) programmer. I've worked on tens of thousands of lines code, collaboratively developed by over 200 developers. Never in my life have I seen a programmer make that mistake, ever. And the error was instantly visible to me, as it should be to any decent programmer. In fact, any editor I've ever used will immediately outdent do_that(), preventing you from making that mistake.
C has its warts, but the brackets aren't one of them.
I've never had the opportunity to program in python or any other whitespace-delimited language, so I won't disparage that method. But your statement about "many C bugs" being caused by improper indentation is just rediculous.
Slashdot Mirror
Unfortunately this is a great way to have to learn two languages (HaXe and Javascript) instead of one. I believe browser support for "source-level" operations (debugging, profiling, etc) for compile-to-JS languages will come some day, but that day is not today.
And why do you place no value on these things? They all seem like pretty important things to contribute to a good user experience. Kudos to MS for inventing them.
Unless of course, MS did not invent them. But then you should be able to show prior art and get the patents invalidated.
I think most people agree that a nuclear plant can be operated safely, with a much lower environmental impact over its lifetime than a similar output "traditional" (coal/gas) power plant.
Where I think some are naive is in estimating the potential for human nature to do the things necessary to operate a nuclear plant safely for its lifetime. The problem is that most of the things required for safety (regular maintenance, proper decommissioning, technology upgrades) are high costs whose benefits do not show up immediately (or perhaps, ever) on the balance sheet. This means that no matter how well-intentioned a nuclear plant owner is at the outset, there is a chance that they will not do these things. Once an upgrade is skipped and there is no consequence, the next upgrade is even more costly, and even more likely to be skipped.
One solution to this might be more regulation, to try to force the companies to work toward goals other than the bottom line. Unfortunately, government changes over time and sometimes is clearly in the pocket of corporations rather than the public good. Assuming that you could prevent this from happening for a century or more is not realistic.
I could fault the owners of these plants for not having a perfectly spotless record of safety improvements and maintenance, or the government for failing to hold the companies to a high enough standard. But honestly, we should know better than to put our faith in any system that is inherently unstable, requires continuous inflows of money and manpower to remain safe, has an operational lifetime that spans generations, and has a large decommissioning cost.
Reposting from a previous 3D TV story...
If I have to wear glasses anyway, why not put LCDs in the glasses themselves? You'd get a full edge-to-edge experience, avoiding some of the weird off-screen 3D effects. You'd always be in the "sweet spot", avoiding the off-center weird geometry effects. You could go 120Hz on both eyes and make the correct matching frames appear at exactly the same time, avoiding the headache-inducing strobe effect. You would not have ghosting or other distortion caused by trying to use the same display surface for two independent images.
I am cautiously optimistic about 3D as a whole, but I don't understand why I need to buy into the 3D TV paradigm in order to get a 3D experience. I would prefer to simply use active-screen glasses.
If I have to wear glasses anyway, why not put LCDs in the glasses themselves? You'd get a full edge-to-edge experience, avoiding some of the weird off-screen 3D effects. You'd always be in the "sweet spot", avoiding the off-center weird geometry effects. You could go 120Hz on both eyes and make the correct matching frames appear at exactly the same time, avoiding the headache-inducing strobe effect. You would not have ghosting or other distortion caused by trying to use the same display surface for two independent images.
I am cautiously optimistic about 3D as a whole, but I don't understand why I need to buy into the 3D TV paradigm in order to get a 3D experience. I would prefer to simply use active-screen glasses.
Heaps of bugs, graphical glitches, broken quests (trading)? Sounds just like Ultima 9.
Does anyone know how to re-enable it?
Unlike some here, I actually find the extension valuable and wish to have it active. I am quite annoyed that Firefox decided to block it without giving me any choice in the matter.
BTW I understand that my own frustration at having this blocked without consent is similar to the frustration of those who wish not to have the extension but had it given to them without consent. That does not excuse either party. As a user I am now bearing the brunt of this petty squabble between MS and FF.
I tried out VS2010 and found it to have some nice improvements; though nothing earth-shattering for me personally, it has some little things that are nice-to-have, and I can see how those things would improve productivity. But I had such severe performance problems I had to give up using it.
In a solution with 12 C# projects and 3 C++ projects, compiling takes around 5 minutes (took under a minute with VS2008) and hangs the UI completely for nearly the entire time. It also seems to not honor dependencies quite right, because compiling a second time with changes in only one project without downstream dependencies still takes nearly as long.
I sincerely hope Microsoft invests some more effort in the performance side of things prior to RTM, if they do, I'll be happy to upgrade.
Your numbers are incorrect.
Xbox 360 with 120gb drive (Elite) and wireless adapter: $400
Extra controller - $40 Amazon
Charging kit - $17 Amazon
Memory card (absolutely not necessary BTW) - $43 Amazon
I refuse to include headphones as you need them whether you use a PC or a console, therefore it is not relevant to your argument.
The total is $457, or $500 if you truly must have the memory card. You'll be able to play every Xbox 360 game without worrying about whether it is compatible. The graphics will look great and have an excellent framerate, having been fine-tuned for the Xbox capabilities. You'll never have a driver incompatibility. You'll never have a virus (hopefully I'll never have to eat these words!). You'll be able to play on your TV, which in most cases is larger and easier on the eyes than your computer monitor, that was designed for high-contrast stuff like word processing. You'll be able to play in the comfort of your couch, which in most cases is more comfortable than your office chair, that is designed for upright posture and typing.
You will be hard-pressed to find a $500 PC that can play 1 year old games, let alone the newest ones. And during the 5 year lifespan of a console, you will spend many times that amount trying to keep your PC upgraded to the latest video card.
Vista verifies the signature automatically, and I (as a developer) wish that every OS did the same. It's not about free software developers OR commercial developers, it is about the security of the system which transports software from a developer to the end user. It also has absolutely nothing to do with Microsoft, other than the fact that they are at the forefront of enforcing this security.
Perhaps you place no value in security. That is the only way you can make the claim that you value code signatures (and signature verification) at $0.
Although I'm sure you were joking when you said "cash", here's an idea of how that much cash would look.
;(
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2008189,00.html
Considering that this is 2/3 as much ($8bn vs $12bn) you could scale down and say that if this were presented as packages of $100 bills, it would weigh approximately (363*2/3) = 242 tons.
It's somewhat annoying to measure cash in "tons of $100 bills" and to think that none of it going to me
You appear not to understand what signing is, how it works, or why it is important.
It is not a tax on legitimate software developers. It is a way for any user to ensure that they are getting software from the source that they think they are getting it from.
A signature does not guarantee that you are not getting a trojan, or that the software has any sort of quality at all. The only thing it guarantees is that party A cannot send you software that claims to be from party B. The expectation is that certain developers/companies/people will have some reputation which users trust, and the signature makes sure that nobody else can harm that reputation by pretending to be the trusted party.
The first time people start getting signed trojans, they will immediately lose trust in the party who signed it. Users could still elect to install software from that company but based on reputation, they should expect trojans.
To verify signatures and support signature revocation in case the key is stolen, keys need to be regularly checked against a trusted third party (like Verisign). So that third party has a continual bandwidth and infrastructure cost. The cost of the signature is to offset that cost (and of course, make money too) but the cost is tiny compared to the value of reputation.
Saying "everyone else manages without it" is like saying "I've never been robbed before, and none of my friends have been robbed before, therefore there is no need for door locks." It's naive. If you are a developer, it will take only one instance of someone distributing a trojan in your name before you come to value a signature validation service.
On par with Java?! Don't be ridiculous.
Boehm's gc is far better than nothing. But comparing a kludgy hack in a language with non-typed pointers, to a language and runtime designed from the ground up for garbage collection, is laughable.
Come back when you understand heap compaction, generational garbage collection, and the difference between references (which are typesafe, tightly controlled, and known by the runtime) and pointers.
modern cars that can go 100,000 miles with *no service* -- not even oil changes
Please, god, don't let me ever buy a used car after you've owned it.
There has never been any automobile capable of such a feat. The best you will find are a rare few which, if driven carefully, can go 15,000 miles per oil change.
Read your owner's manual. Almost all cars require an oil change every 5,000 miles, unless they use pure synthetic; and those usually require an oil change after 7,500-10,000 miles.
I had that exact phone, with the same problem. I solved it by fashioning a paper clip into a hoop, slightly larger than the button. Then I super-glued the hoop around the button, thus creating a raised lip around the button. The result was that pushing the button against a flat surface (like the inside of my pocket) could not push the button, but a rounded surface (such as the end of a finger) could easily push it. A little black modelers paint and it looked like it should have always been designed like that.
BTW, Samsung did not learn their lesson for quite a while. My wife's Samsung phone, two generations later than the one I had, was unlocked by pressing either a sequence of keys under the flip, or holding down a single button on the side - not covered by the flip. Neither I nor she have purchased any Samsung product since.
Although it claims to be "The five best game console controllers of all time", it is more like, "Five inflential or important controllers except the Wii". You cannot argue that these are the best controllers. Every aspect of most of these have already been improved upon.
You know what everyone says about opinions, but here's mine. The 5 best controllers of all time:
5. Nintendo Wavebird. A little quirky and heavy but totally usable. Beats the hell out of an Atari 2600 joystick, that's for sure.
4. PS2 Dualshock. A bit too small to be rated higher - the 360's controller is much more comfortable to hold. But the overall feel is much better than any controller to come before it. The PS3's controller is a downgrade, with no rumble ability and a quirky roll sensor.
3. Guitar Hero guitar. This controller is specialized but it has a fantastic feel, takes major abuse and keeps working perfectly (millions of strums!) and just looks damn cool. It is a visceral experience, the controller helps with the suspension of disbelief that really helps you get into the game and feel like a real guitar player.
2. XBox 360 controller. What more can be said about this. It's one great-feeling, easy-to-use controller. For playing traditional games, there is none better.
1. Wii controller (nunchuck + remote). Redefines video game control. Nobody can argue that this won't have a profound effect on future console design. Sucks for traditional games, but in 10 years, will anyone remember that?
Ultima. 1-7 (including 7 pt.2) got progressively better, until finally reaching what I consider one of the best RPGs of all time. 8 was a letdown, 9 was a nightmare, X was cancelled. Killed by EA in order to focus on Ultima Online.
How long until Intel releases a quad-core notebook CPU? And does anyone know what the codename is for that?
I want one of these but I need the portability of a notebook.
"as a disembodied head living in a jar, I envy the dead."
-George Foreman's Head
Perhaps v1 of the system could have a max speed of 20mph while under computer control. That would make it much less likely to be fatal if there were any problems, and yet still fast enough for short commutes. I know I'd be just as happy traveling to work at 20 mph, if I could gain the benefit of not having to do the driving myself.
As the bugs are worked out and the confidence in the system improves, the top speed could be raised.
Only real problem with this system is that you would have to have "auto-drive" lanes so that manual-drive, faster-moving cars wouldn't cause accidents. Not too bad of a problem though since its the same as our HOV lanes now.
(*) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
/var/spool/mail (or Archive.pst if you are on Windows) directly, thus bypassing any hashcash calculation, and intercepts outgoing email to a given address & posts it on the board automatically, if you really must have an email gateway to the discussion.
Although others have suggested a whitelist for legitimate bulk email, I propose that there is no legitimate bulk email.
Why do mailing lists exist anymore? Any valid use of a mailing list is better as an online forum (Slashcode is a great example, and so is Phorum). Add an RSS feed or some other polling client and you have timely notification of new posts. Plus you can have moderators, thread grouping always happens properly, there are excellent search capabilities, and achives can be browsed much more easily.
I'm sure someone would be happy to code up a client that brings new posts into
Copying movies is very important, especially in light of this:
CDs and DVDs Not So Immortal After All
Tivos have, and have always had, SPDIF outputs.
Please don't spread lies and misinformation.
$4.99 per month on the total choice programming package, for an unlimited number of TiVos (no additional charge for more than one)
No monthly charges on the premier packages.
And the packages themselves have more channels, with better audio & video quality, for a lower monthly fee than any cable company I've investigated.
Certainly not an unreasonable price.
I'm a C (and C-like languages) programmer. I've worked on tens of thousands of lines code, collaboratively developed by over 200 developers. Never in my life have I seen a programmer make that mistake, ever. And the error was instantly visible to me, as it should be to any decent programmer. In fact, any editor I've ever used will immediately outdent do_that(), preventing you from making that mistake.
C has its warts, but the brackets aren't one of them.
I've never had the opportunity to program in python or any other whitespace-delimited language, so I won't disparage that method. But your statement about "many C bugs" being caused by improper indentation is just rediculous.