You missed the point more important to me: >> As if space for config files would matter...
Ah, so I did. Space isn't a really big deal, but I prefer not to waste it given the choice.
A increase by some factor is debateable.
I think it's provable, but I suppose there's no point.:)
It is human-readable.
Just barely. In small samples, sure, no problem. For a huge data file, forget it. That's like browsing the web with telnet. There's so much superfluous information (even ignoring the visual noise from angle blackets) that the thing you're really looking for is very hard to find.
Imagine you were looking to fix the "george" attribute for any element in something like your example: <dsf fred=blah henry=blah martha=blah/> <elizabeth joe=blah grant=blah george=blah/> <alice bob=blah carol=blah david=blah/> <ed florence=blah george=blah henry=blah/> <ssfg mark=blah beth=blah ed=blah/>
All the extra structure that the XML file has is stored in a non-transparent way, and makes the file harder to read. In this case, there is no extra structure with XML, but the existing structure is now stored in a way that makes parsing it by eye take longer.
I think that is the main problem. Your personal dislike for XML. I don't think, I can discuss your aversion away.
Yes, I have a personal dislike for XML. This is based on my own experience of working with it. It's not like I have some irrational fear of TLAs.
I do think that XML has its place, but a "human readable" config format is not it.
Re:The only once inside the GNOME-community
on
Has GNOME Become LAME?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Compress your examples: XML=111b INI=94b (bzip2)
Is this supposed to be for or against XML? An 18% increase in size after compression is nothing to boast about. (and the XML can never be smaller, it has more information in it)
Ever programmed a validating parser?
There's a lot more to validate in XML than simpler formats. With the ini format, for example, there's basically two errors: "I can't find this," or "This line makes no sense."
Every progam its own parser.
ini format is pretty standard, not to mention that formats of this complexity have trivial parsers.
Well, certainly is the XML-syntax less readable then the INI-format.
I'll say. I'm a programmer and XML files hurt my eyes. Screw John Doe, *I* don't want to look at them.
Try an XML-editor, feed it the DTD or Schema, and it will check your modifications.
This is a cop out, you're essentially saying "yeah, I know it's not human readable, but you don't really need that."
If that's what you want, you might as well go for a binary format. You could have a binary format that's just as expressive and save a lot of space.
They can't make them appear in the same way that other received headers appear.
Sure they can, nothing's to stop them from posing as another machine relaying the mail. An SMTP relay can't tell the difference between another relay and the original sender.
the problem I see with most spam is that the headers have been forged to the point of illegitimacy. Sure, if they include a link to a website, you could go after the person or people listed in the WHOIS record, but it would be easy for the administrative contact to claim that he or she didn't send the spam.
You are guaranteed that the ip address of the machine at which the spam originated is in the header. Find who's responsible for that machine.
This may be difficult if they forge "Recieved from" lines, which they would probably start to do, but that wouldn't make it impossible.
A 64-bit machine can also handle 64-bit integers as a native data type.
Current x86 processors can partially handle 64-bit integers as a native data type with MMX and such. No direct mult/div, but I think the rest is there.
The cause is very obvious: corporations. They have the money and power to lobby for extentions and special rights on their legal monopolies. The solution is simple: eliminate corporate right of ownership of IP, and return it to the hands of the inventors and authors.
They also have the money to fund the experimentation that leads to innovation. If an inventor needs some motivation or reimbursement for their creation, why would a corporation not need the same to fund larger projects which could not be handled by an individual?
Eliminating the transfer of IP rights might be interesting, as long as the rights were properly assigned in the first place.
Religion is based on faith, that's what defines it.
Faith in what? Do you really understand what faith is? You can't have faith in someone or something until you're sure that they exist, and that something has been promised.
In the case of Judeo-Christian religions, it is God in who you must have faith, because He has promised something that you can't prove that He'll give you. You can justify this by looking back at what He has already done, but this doesn't prove anything.
Money is a good example, in an economic system, you must have faith in money. For any particular piece of money, there is a promise that other people will take it in exchange for goods/services. You can take a piece of money and see that it's true, but you can't prove that it's true for the rest of your cash.
People who believe there is a god because they "have faith" are really deluding themselves. Who or what is it that they have faith in?
OP was not asking what it meant, but whether this claim was valid.
Section 2(b):
b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.
contains no prohibition against adding another license.
I think Section 4 might cover it though:
4.
You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain in full compliance.
If the tax is on the transaction, should the vendor or the customer be taxed for it? If I go down to the store and buy something, the store pays the tax. Does that mean the store is being taxed, or is it just collecting the taxes for the government?
And as far as representation is concerned, corporations probably have a better representation, so taxing them would seem more ethical.
If you closely examine any 500 of those 100,000 tosses earlier, you can probably find quite a few runs of 500 lows or more in a row.
As other replies state, this is pretty unlikely, but it can happen. This is similar to the problem of converting an image to a 2-color bitmap, except that it's easier to see the statistical anomolies there.
If you just convert each pixel independently of the others, at random, you can get areas that have too much of one value, similar to having too much "low value" here. The solution for images is to use error diffusion, each time you convert a pixel, you store up a value indicating how far off you were, and use that to adjust the probability for converting the next one.
This way, every low value you get decreases the probability of the next one.
Re:Standing waves..
on
Soundless Music?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
As the other reply mentions, you'll need parallel walls for standing waves to form. In addition, the wavelength is sufficiently large enough that everyone would have *some* experience.
If you get a standing wave, there will be silent spots regardless of the wavelength. Now, if the wavelength is greater than twice the size of the room (depending on where the speaker is) you have no chance of getting a standing wave, but that's another matter.
This would be good IF you had to verify online purchases with the PIN number through your bank's web site.
Like this: - fill out the cc order form at wetakeyourmoney.com - you click the submit button - they record this information and send a request to the card company - at the same time, they redirect you to the card company's web authentification form, which lists unverified transactions - you send your PIN to your bank to verify them - the bank sends the money to wetakeyourmoney.com
If someone breaks into the db at wetakeyourmoney.com, they won't have the PIN and can't validate any transactions. (if they break into the card/bank db you're screwed anyway)
Of course, someone will try to trick you into entering your PIN into a site that looks exactly like the official one, but that's a different problem.
MS is intentionally sending a crippled page to Opera. It's not a typo. When they changed the user string to "Oprah", the correct page was sent (the IE one) and rendered fine. The server is scanning the user agent string for "Opera" and sending it a crippled page purposely.
This determines that MS is intentionally sending a different style sheet to Opera. You have not shown that it was intentionally crippled.
Its not foolproof but its a pretty good bet that if you're getting more than one OS string from the browser ID within say 10 seconds from each other from the same IP there's more than one computer there.
There's 4 computers on our network with the exact same OS on them.
You might as well throw darts at a board and read the score as the number of computers behind the firewall.
I think, to some degree, this is an important point. No one (no individual) needs 18 quintillion addresses. Giving people way more addresses than they need is what lead to earlier problems with the address space of IPv4. Now there's still more (lots more)/64 blocks of IPv6 than total addresses in IPv4, but do we really want to risk repeating the mistakes of the past?
If that happened, I wonder if the consumers would:
a) start looking for software that doesn't have a binding license attached, or
b) just complain constantly about having to sign for their software Unfortunately, a look at the average consumer makes me think that b) is the more likely outcome.
That's fine. Software without a license would have a "nothing to sign at the counter" sticker on the box, which would encourage people to avoid the inconvenience.
Um, that may be... except that building the LCD panel from raw materials requires very special equipment (which probably would offset the savings). Even using an LCD panel without a controller is insane for anyone without the capability to manufacture chips (just attaching something to the glass connector is difficult).
Creating an interface for a panel without an RS232 port on it is childsplay by comparison. (and you'd save money even if you have to buy all the equipment)
So let's see, saving $60 with a small (possible for a hobbyist) amount of work vs. saving $9.75 with a large (infeasable unless you have your own team of chip design engineers, a fab, and a factory to make LCD panels) amount of work... No, you're right, that's a valid comparison.
If you're good with electronics, don't get those LCD displays with built in serial port, they cost a LOT more. Simple text displays have a standard 7 or 14 pin interface that's really simple to operate.
2x20 text LCD shouldn't be much more than $10. With backlight, $20. (prices from a quick google search, so there might be better)
Slashdot Mirror
You missed the point more important to me:
:)
>> As if space for config files would matter...
Ah, so I did. Space isn't a really big deal, but I prefer not to waste it given the choice.
A increase by some factor is debateable.
I think it's provable, but I suppose there's no point.
It is human-readable.
Just barely. In small samples, sure, no problem. For a huge data file, forget it. That's like browsing the web with telnet. There's so much superfluous information (even ignoring the visual noise from angle blackets) that the thing you're really looking for is very hard to find.
Imagine you were looking to fix the "george" attribute for any element in something like your example:
<dsf fred=blah henry=blah martha=blah/>
<elizabeth joe=blah grant=blah george=blah/>
<alice bob=blah carol=blah david=blah/>
<ed florence=blah george=blah henry=blah/>
<ssfg mark=blah beth=blah ed=blah/>
All the extra structure that the XML file has is stored in a non-transparent way, and makes the file harder to read. In this case, there is no extra structure with XML, but the existing structure is now stored in a way that makes parsing it by eye take longer.
I think that is the main problem. Your personal dislike for XML. I don't think, I can discuss your aversion away.
Yes, I have a personal dislike for XML. This is based on my own experience of working with it. It's not like I have some irrational fear of TLAs.
I do think that XML has its place, but a "human readable" config format is not it.
Compress your examples: XML=111b INI=94b (bzip2)
Is this supposed to be for or against XML? An 18% increase in size after compression is nothing to boast about. (and the XML can never be smaller, it has more information in it)
Ever programmed a validating parser?
There's a lot more to validate in XML than simpler formats. With the ini format, for example, there's basically two errors: "I can't find this," or "This line makes no sense."
Every progam its own parser.
ini format is pretty standard, not to mention that formats of this complexity have trivial parsers.
Well, certainly is the XML-syntax less readable then the INI-format.
I'll say. I'm a programmer and XML files hurt my eyes. Screw John Doe, *I* don't want to look at them.
Try an XML-editor, feed it the DTD or Schema, and it will check your modifications.
This is a cop out, you're essentially saying "yeah, I know it's not human readable, but you don't really need that."
If that's what you want, you might as well go for a binary format. You could have a binary format that's just as expressive and save a lot of space.
They can't make them appear in the same way that other received headers appear.
Sure they can, nothing's to stop them from posing as another machine relaying the mail. An SMTP relay can't tell the difference between another relay and the original sender.
the problem I see with most spam is that the headers have been forged to the point of illegitimacy. Sure, if they include a link to a website, you could go after the person or people listed in the WHOIS record, but it would be easy for the administrative contact to claim that he or she didn't send the spam.
You are guaranteed that the ip address of the machine at which the spam originated is in the header. Find who's responsible for that machine.
This may be difficult if they forge "Recieved from" lines, which they would probably start to do, but that wouldn't make it impossible.
You must be a scripter. ;)
A 64-bit machine can also handle 64-bit integers as a native data type.
Current x86 processors can partially handle 64-bit integers as a native data type with MMX and such. No direct mult/div, but I think the rest is there.
The cause is very obvious: corporations. They have the money and power to lobby for extentions and special rights on their legal monopolies. The solution is simple: eliminate corporate right of ownership of IP, and return it to the hands of the inventors and authors.
They also have the money to fund the experimentation that leads to innovation. If an inventor needs some motivation or reimbursement for their creation, why would a corporation not need the same to fund larger projects which could not be handled by an individual?
Eliminating the transfer of IP rights might be interesting, as long as the rights were properly assigned in the first place.
Religion is based on faith, that's what defines it.
Faith in what? Do you really understand what faith is? You can't have faith in someone or something until you're sure that they exist, and that something has been promised.
In the case of Judeo-Christian religions, it is God in who you must have faith, because He has promised something that you can't prove that He'll give you. You can justify this by looking back at what He has already done, but this doesn't prove anything.
Money is a good example, in an economic system, you must have faith in money. For any particular piece of money, there is a promise that other people will take it in exchange for goods/services. You can take a piece of money and see that it's true, but you can't prove that it's true for the rest of your cash.
People who believe there is a god because they "have faith" are really deluding themselves. Who or what is it that they have faith in?
Section 2(b):
contains no prohibition against adding another license.
I think Section 4 might cover it though:
(emph. mine, of course, and ianal)
Who's being taxed?
If the tax is on the transaction, should the vendor or the customer be taxed for it? If I go down to the store and buy something, the store pays the tax. Does that mean the store is being taxed, or is it just collecting the taxes for the government?
And as far as representation is concerned, corporations probably have a better representation, so taxing them would seem more ethical.
If you closely examine any 500 of those 100,000 tosses earlier, you can probably find quite a few runs of 500 lows or more in a row.
As other replies state, this is pretty unlikely, but it can happen. This is similar to the problem of converting an image to a 2-color bitmap, except that it's easier to see the statistical anomolies there.
If you just convert each pixel independently of the others, at random, you can get areas that have too much of one value, similar to having too much "low value" here. The solution for images is to use error diffusion, each time you convert a pixel, you store up a value indicating how far off you were, and use that to adjust the probability for converting the next one.
This way, every low value you get decreases the probability of the next one.
As the other reply mentions, you'll need parallel walls for standing waves to form. In addition, the wavelength is sufficiently large enough that everyone would have *some* experience.
If you get a standing wave, there will be silent spots regardless of the wavelength. Now, if the wavelength is greater than twice the size of the room (depending on where the speaker is) you have no chance of getting a standing wave, but that's another matter.
What, was sixdegrees too much?
You want to be an editor editor? Somehow that just doesn't seem right.
This would be good IF you had to verify online purchases with the PIN number through your bank's web site.
Like this:
- fill out the cc order form at wetakeyourmoney.com
- you click the submit button
- they record this information and send a request to the card company
- at the same time, they redirect you to the card company's web authentification form, which lists unverified transactions
- you send your PIN to your bank to verify them
- the bank sends the money to wetakeyourmoney.com
If someone breaks into the db at wetakeyourmoney.com, they won't have the PIN and can't validate any transactions. (if they break into the card/bank db you're screwed anyway)
Of course, someone will try to trick you into entering your PIN into a site that looks exactly like the official one, but that's a different problem.
Wouldn't it be easier to just have the smtp server delay the response to the TO field by 5 seconds per recipient?
Of course, this might cause problems for mailing lists...
MS is intentionally sending a crippled page to Opera. It's not a typo. When they changed the user string to "Oprah", the correct page was sent (the IE one) and rendered fine. The server is scanning the user agent string for "Opera" and sending it a crippled page purposely.
This determines that MS is intentionally sending a different style sheet to Opera. You have not shown that it was intentionally crippled.
Its not foolproof but its a pretty good bet that if you're getting more than one OS string from the browser ID within say 10 seconds from each other from the same IP there's more than one computer there.
There's 4 computers on our network with the exact same OS on them.
You might as well throw darts at a board and read the score as the number of computers behind the firewall.
I think, to some degree, this is an important point. No one (no individual) needs 18 quintillion addresses. Giving people way more addresses than they need is what lead to earlier problems with the address space of IPv4. Now there's still more (lots more) /64 blocks of IPv6 than total addresses in IPv4, but do we really want to risk repeating the mistakes of the past?
Its just a couple computers strung together with some wire, air waves, and carrying a few bits.
The printing press only produced a bunch of letters on paper, and look what it has achieved. Don't trivialize communication.
A search for 'ask slashdot correct answer'
returns 10,400 hits.
It's more rare than this first indicates.
'ask slashdot not correct answer'
returns 10,300 hits.
So only 100 are actually correct, the rest are complaining about it not being correct.
Weird Stuff used to sell lots of hardware with labels that said "Guaranteed not to work."
Essentially, all software says that.
(The labels went on to say "if it does work, bring it back and we'll replace it with one that doesn't")
If that happened, I wonder if the consumers would:
a) start looking for software that doesn't have a binding license attached, or
b) just complain constantly about having to sign for their software
Unfortunately, a look at the average consumer makes me think that b) is the more likely outcome.
That's fine. Software without a license would have a "nothing to sign at the counter" sticker on the box, which would encourage people to avoid the inconvenience.
Um, that may be... except that building the LCD panel from raw materials requires very special equipment (which probably would offset the savings). Even using an LCD panel without a controller is insane for anyone without the capability to manufacture chips (just attaching something to the glass connector is difficult).
Creating an interface for a panel without an RS232 port on it is childsplay by comparison. (and you'd save money even if you have to buy all the equipment)
So let's see, saving $60 with a small (possible for a hobbyist) amount of work vs. saving $9.75 with a large (infeasable unless you have your own team of chip design engineers, a fab, and a factory to make LCD panels) amount of work... No, you're right, that's a valid comparison.
If you're good with electronics, don't get those LCD displays with built in serial port, they cost a LOT more. Simple text displays have a standard 7 or 14 pin interface that's really simple to operate.
2x20 text LCD shouldn't be much more than $10. With backlight, $20. (prices from a quick google search, so there might be better)