Well, I have a Gmail account, but Hotmail has worked fine for me. Yahoo has the same issue, same solution (I think) - a WebDAV interface, if one could be constructed.
Like I said, the lack of Hotmail. And yes, I know there are addon apps that do it, but frankly I see no particular reason to even consider them beyond noting that one of the most popular uses Java and is thus going to suck even more of my precious megabytes away. Thunderbird has to offer more in the way of features for me, not less.:-)
The lack of Hotmail would be my better reason, but, you know, I don't really need one! If one thing is better for one reason, then why choose it over the other?
My mail client is something I have loaded all the time. I consider the resources it uses "lost" to other programs. If I lose about 75% more resources with one mail client than another, and the one that uses fewer resources actually does more, then the decision is clear.
That's 15 *thousand* kilobytes. Sorry, not used to working in numbers below that nowadays. Note that I said OE used 20 and TB 35 . . . if either of them actually used 35 kilobytes I'd be laughing.:-)
Basically, Thunderbird took too much in the way of resources for too little in the way of features. No Hotmail was a big no (yes, I considered writing it myself, but I was put off by the number of people who had started and failed before:-). I just had to look at task manager, though. Why would I want to switch to an app that used 35k when I had one that worked in 20? Just not sensible. So I stay with OE.
Well, you missed/ignored the bit about assumed context (add "to IBM" to the end of that sentance). Now, if you assume that all posts exist in isolation, that's right, but given that we were talking about . ..
. . . but what the heck, it's not worth arguing it, is it? You go do interesting stuff, and I can go to bed! (5am != good_time_to_sleep)
Not in IBM's eyes. I kinda thought that this context was obvious given the fact that the whole post was about IBM's competition. You're technically right that a scholar in general doesn't have to be, but so what?:-)
IBM would be unlikely to accept such a person into their competition, and that was my point - in their view, your definition of scholarship does not apply.
As for the accreditedness stuff, I would assume that's because they don't want people in your category saying "Oh, I'm from the University of DeFry" when they're really moonlighting as a programmer while working full-time at the local McDonalds.;-)
. .. 2. One who attends school or studies with a teacher; a student.
IBM is using this definition. Which seems obvious when you regard how the competition is targeted - the article even mentions "to drum up enthusiasm among students"
Guess what - if you're not at an accredited university, you don't count as a scholar! Maybe you learnt stuff in your spare time, but if you are hands-on rather than making a habit of it, it doesn't count.:-)
(OK, so people at high school get excluded, too, but I suspect if they managed to produce an adequate answer I suspect they'd let it slide, and probably sponsor him/her through univerersity as well)
Good leaders don't come from nowhere. Maybe one of the better ways to become one would be to read the book. I mean, heck, I'm right out of university - I'm not exactly ready to lead a team of programmers. If I did somehow end up having to do so, I'd be glad to have some help, even if it only got me up to mediocre.:-)
Re:Did the editors mod this down ??
on
Rob Pike Responds
·
· Score: 1
It's almost as if having lost its bitterly fought case against the p2p application owners and failed in its many obvious (and expensive) attempts to disrupt the p2p networks, the music industry is now determined to vent its wrath on helpless men, women and children who can't hope to stand up to it with its tremendous political and financial power.
Of course it is - they're the ones causing all the problems!
This will harm what I'm doing. I would like very much to rely on WMP being installed. If I can't do this, it means I'll have to tell people to install it, and that means fewer people will use my products. Ironically they involve making your own media player using the media technologies in WMP as a base, so it's actually stifling competition.:-)
Microsoft is a company. Companies get paid to do what people want. When Windows was originally created, code security was not top of the list, but performance was highly important, therefore they optimised for that (integrated graphics system in NT 4, etc). Nowadays security is far more of an issue so they're coding for that. That's just how things work with companies.
Exactly why we were given it, I would imagine! And yeah, it would have been cool, but hey, I felt just fine with being in the top 15 rather than the top 5. Ironically that was the year before the inspectors said "hey, your school sucks at IT", and the computing budget got a £1mil boost.:-)
Umm, the team is judged by how well it does as a team, not the individuals in it. Sure, you have to be good individually to get in, but if they knew who the good guys were they'd put you in teams to start with. Besides, who wants someone who can't code in a programming contest?;-)
It was fun. I think the best part was the comradeship - I'd never really been among "my own kind" in a big way before, and actually meeting others who "get" it is a real experience.
Well, that was what they were looking for, of course - the ideal solution, not the brute-force-in-low-overhead-language. The whole premis of half of Programming Pearls is about using the right algorithm mattering more.;-)
Perhaps, if I'd wanted to. I do know some people at Lionhead, it's not quite the life I want to lead. Still, does show it's a reasonable measure of potential.:-)
*reads* - nice to see someone else from Whitgift got in last year as well. We got someone in as the reserve once, I think . . . although to be honest, "we" doesn't have much of a place in such an individual contest.
VB ruled, VB.NET is quite neat as well. Wrote my dissertation around a program using it, which probably wasn't quite to my supervisor's taste, but it got me the marks.;-)
And yes, the rooms were skanky, but at least they were free!
Back in the day (2000), I actually got into the final of the British Informatics Olympiad. I'm not sure what the format is elsewhere, but basically they sent out a self-administering test to schools (all the schools in the UK, I think) and had them run it locally, seeing how much of a few interesting puzzles you could write in three hours or so - you can find out more on the site. All programming, no justification, you were scored on results (in that round), which I thought was the way it should be - after all, results are what matters in real life!
All the cool people were using C or Pascal. I used QuickBASIC! And yet I got the right results for enough of the questions (the C guy got his output board the wrong way up), and so I was invited to Cambridge. The best part about the first round was that I hadn't even done the last round right - I just said "yes, that's right" to the sample case and "No, impossible" to everything else.;-)
Anyhoo, I got to Cambridge (for you USAians, one of our old "Ivy League" colleges) where I learnt to my relief that they had installed QuickBASIC especially for the two of us who had actually got in with it (15 finalists total) - they were shocked at having to, I can tell you! Of course, I was pretty sure at that stage that I wasn't actually going to win, and so I had a great time and zero stress. The tests itself were a) more of the same, but b) there was also an easay paper. Having not read much about the subject formally, I imagine I did dismally on the latter - I think I got about one and a half on the programming at best. Didn't know how to do efficient sorting! Still, it was great fun, and really set my mind on becoming a programmer.
The best part was, we got room, board and tours around Cambridge absolutely free (I guess they were looking to recruit a few of us to Cambridge). I even saw Stephen Hawking whizzing around on his motorised wheelchair! We got given two books at the end of it - Programming Pearls and Introduction to Computer Algorithms. Both darn good books, although I admit to reading the first more closely than the second.;-)
There are plenty of recent [1-2 years] games selling little to no units [if they're even still available at retail] that could be licensed for a relatively low cost in order to keep the 1 game a month schedule on pace.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, I have a Gmail account, but Hotmail has worked fine for me. Yahoo has the same issue, same solution (I think) - a WebDAV interface, if one could be constructed.
Like I said, the lack of Hotmail. And yes, I know there are addon apps that do it, but frankly I see no particular reason to even consider them beyond noting that one of the most popular uses Java and is thus going to suck even more of my precious megabytes away. Thunderbird has to offer more in the way of features for me, not less. :-)
The lack of Hotmail would be my better reason, but, you know, I don't really need one! If one thing is better for one reason, then why choose it over the other?
My mail client is something I have loaded all the time. I consider the resources it uses "lost" to other programs. If I lose about 75% more resources with one mail client than another, and the one that uses fewer resources actually does more, then the decision is clear.
That's 15 *thousand* kilobytes. Sorry, not used to working in numbers below that nowadays. Note that I said OE used 20 and TB 35 . . . if either of them actually used 35 kilobytes I'd be laughing. :-)
Basically, Thunderbird took too much in the way of resources for too little in the way of features. No Hotmail was a big no (yes, I considered writing it myself, but I was put off by the number of people who had started and failed before :-). I just had to look at task manager, though. Why would I want to switch to an app that used 35k when I had one that worked in 20? Just not sensible. So I stay with OE.
Well, you missed/ignored the bit about assumed context (add "to IBM" to the end of that sentance). Now, if you assume that all posts exist in isolation, that's right, but given that we were talking about . . .
. . . but what the heck, it's not worth arguing it, is it? You go do interesting stuff, and I can go to bed! (5am != good_time_to_sleep)
Not in IBM's eyes. I kinda thought that this context was obvious given the fact that the whole post was about IBM's competition. You're technically right that a scholar in general doesn't have to be, but so what? :-)
;-)
IBM would be unlikely to accept such a person into their competition, and that was my point - in their view, your definition of scholarship does not apply.
As for the accreditedness stuff, I would assume that's because they don't want people in your category saying "Oh, I'm from the University of DeFry" when they're really moonlighting as a programmer while working full-time at the local McDonalds.
. . .
2. One who attends school or studies with a teacher; a student.
IBM is using this definition. Which seems obvious when you regard how the competition is targeted - the article even mentions "to drum up enthusiasm among students"
Guess what - if you're not at an accredited university, you don't count as a scholar! Maybe you learnt stuff in your spare time, but if you are hands-on rather than making a habit of it, it doesn't count. :-)
(OK, so people at high school get excluded, too, but I suspect if they managed to produce an adequate answer I suspect they'd let it slide, and probably sponsor him/her through univerersity as well)
Good leaders don't come from nowhere. Maybe one of the better ways to become one would be to read the book. I mean, heck, I'm right out of university - I'm not exactly ready to lead a team of programmers. If I did somehow end up having to do so, I'd be glad to have some help, even if it only got me up to mediocre. :-)
If I'd had point, I'd have modded it down.
It's almost as if having lost its bitterly fought case against the p2p application owners and failed in its many obvious (and expensive) attempts to disrupt the p2p networks, the music industry is now determined to vent its wrath on helpless men, women and children who can't hope to stand up to it with its tremendous political and financial power.
Of course it is - they're the ones causing all the problems!
This will harm what I'm doing. I would like very much to rely on WMP being installed. If I can't do this, it means I'll have to tell people to install it, and that means fewer people will use my products. Ironically they involve making your own media player using the media technologies in WMP as a base, so it's actually stifling competition. :-)
Microsoft is a company. Companies get paid to do what people want. When Windows was originally created, code security was not top of the list, but performance was highly important, therefore they optimised for that (integrated graphics system in NT 4, etc). Nowadays security is far more of an issue so they're coding for that. That's just how things work with companies.
Exactly why we were given it, I would imagine! And yeah, it would have been cool, but hey, I felt just fine with being in the top 15 rather than the top 5. Ironically that was the year before the inspectors said "hey, your school sucks at IT", and the computing budget got a £1mil boost. :-)
Umm, the team is judged by how well it does as a team, not the individuals in it. Sure, you have to be good individually to get in, but if they knew who the good guys were they'd put you in teams to start with. Besides, who wants someone who can't code in a programming contest? ;-)
Oh yeah, and one thing I forgot to mention - we got a load of gear from Data Connection, the sponsors of the year (not, alas, Lionhead!).
:-)
I still use the mousemat to this day . . . and the towel, although it's one of the thinnest I've ever seen.
It was fun. I think the best part was the comradeship - I'd never really been among "my own kind" in a big way before, and actually meeting others who "get" it is a real experience.
Well, that was what they were looking for, of course - the ideal solution, not the brute-force-in-low-overhead-language. The whole premis of half of Programming Pearls is about using the right algorithm mattering more. ;-)
Perhaps, if I'd wanted to. I do know some people at Lionhead, it's not quite the life I want to lead. Still, does show it's a reasonable measure of potential. :-)
*reads* - nice to see someone else from Whitgift got in last year as well. We got someone in as the reserve once, I think . . . although to be honest, "we" doesn't have much of a place in such an individual contest.
VB ruled, VB.NET is quite neat as well. Wrote my dissertation around a program using it, which probably wasn't quite to my supervisor's taste, but it got me the marks. ;-)
And yes, the rooms were skanky, but at least they were free!
Whereas, of course, contestants for the IOCC attracts people attempting to construct the programs of choice for indiscriminate hackers. :-)
Back in the day (2000), I actually got into the final of the British Informatics Olympiad. I'm not sure what the format is elsewhere, but basically they sent out a self-administering test to schools (all the schools in the UK, I think) and had them run it locally, seeing how much of a few interesting puzzles you could write in three hours or so - you can find out more on the site. All programming, no justification, you were scored on results (in that round), which I thought was the way it should be - after all, results are what matters in real life!
;-)
;-)
All the cool people were using C or Pascal. I used QuickBASIC! And yet I got the right results for enough of the questions (the C guy got his output board the wrong way up), and so I was invited to Cambridge. The best part about the first round was that I hadn't even done the last round right - I just said "yes, that's right" to the sample case and "No, impossible" to everything else.
Anyhoo, I got to Cambridge (for you USAians, one of our old "Ivy League" colleges) where I learnt to my relief that they had installed QuickBASIC especially for the two of us who had actually got in with it (15 finalists total) - they were shocked at having to, I can tell you! Of course, I was pretty sure at that stage that I wasn't actually going to win, and so I had a great time and zero stress. The tests itself were a) more of the same, but b) there was also an easay paper. Having not read much about the subject formally, I imagine I did dismally on the latter - I think I got about one and a half on the programming at best. Didn't know how to do efficient sorting! Still, it was great fun, and really set my mind on becoming a programmer.
The best part was, we got room, board and tours around Cambridge absolutely free (I guess they were looking to recruit a few of us to Cambridge). I even saw Stephen Hawking whizzing around on his motorised wheelchair! We got given two books at the end of it - Programming Pearls and Introduction to Computer Algorithms. Both darn good books, although I admit to reading the first more closely than the second.
There are plenty of recent [1-2 years] games selling little to no units [if they're even still available at retail] that could be licensed for a relatively low cost in order to keep the 1 game a month schedule on pace.
That is indeed exactly what Stardock is doing.
Agreed, I've tried it out and it's pretty smooth stuff. Also it doesn't take itself overly seriously, which is always a good thing in a game. :-)
The target reader is assumed to know what SLI is already. You are therefore not meant to be here . . . so go away!