When I first read the parent post I didn't think much of it, but the more I thought about it the more I realized the benefits of re-reading your code.
When I write code I put a lot of thought into the structure and logic flow before I write it. Along the way I try and comment that logic as I go. The problem is the big picture all makes sense to me and I am in a hurry to get all my ideas down. I often find that when I go back and read my code, my comments are full of typos and often do not comment on the really important things.
Perhaps it would be a lot more beneficial for coders (at least me) to go back and read their own code after a few days. When we write it, the logic all seems obvious, but when we go back and review it after forgetting the whole process we can better comment on it.
Re:Is /. a helpline for incompetent businesses...?
on
Becoming a CLEC?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Has anyone else gone through this? What did it cost? How long did it take? Is there a minimum size to make it worthwhile?
He did not ask how to do it or what the laws are, he asked for practical experience.
And as far as being of any interest to the rest of us, many of us here are very interested in legal issues especially as they relate to free trade. While the law may provide for CLEC's, it is reasonable to ask if it is practical for the average company to implement.
Gall's Basic Systems Principles:
on
Systemantics
·
· Score: 5, Informative
For those who want to know more about the book, I found the following list over at ERN
(These are actually from Systemantics: The Underground Text of Systems Lore which I guess is an expanded version of the book reviewed)
Gall's Basic Systems Principles:
Systems in general work poorly or not at all.
New systems generate new problems.
Systems operate by redistributing energy into different forms and into accumulations of different sizes.
Systems tend to grow, and as they grow, they encroach.
Complex systems exhibit unpredictable behavior.
Complex systems tend to oppose their own proper function.
People in systems do not do what the system says they are doing.
A function performed by a larger system is not operationally identical to the function of the same name performed by a smaller system.
The real world is whatever is reported to the system.
Systems attract systems people.
The bigger the system, the narrower and more specialized the interface with individuals.
A complex system cannot be "made" to work; it either works or it doesn't.
A simple system may or may not work.
If a system is working, leave it alone.
15. A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.
Complex systems designed from scratch never work and cannot be patched to make them work; you have to start over, beginning with a working simple system.
In complex systems, malfunction and even total nonfunction may not be detectable for long periods, if ever.
Large complex systems are beyond human capacity to evaluate.
A system that performs a certain way will continue to operate in that way regardless of the need or of changed conditions.
Systems develop goals of their own the instant they come into being.
Intrasystem goals come first.
Complex systems usually operate in failure mode.
A complex system can fail in an infinite number of ways.
The mode of failure of a complex system cannot ordinarily be predicted.
The crucial variables are discovered by accident.
The larger the system, the greater the possibility of unexpected failure.
"Success" or "function" in any system may be failure in the larger or smaller systems to which it is connected.
When a fail-safe system fails, it fails by failing to fail safe.
Complex systems tend to produce complex responses (not solutions) to problems.
Great advances are not produced by systems designed to produce great advances.
Systems aligned with human motivational vectors will sometimes work; systems opposing such vectors work poorly or not at all.
Michigan also uses a Scantron like system.
After you fill in the circes, you feed the paper into the scanner. I think that if there is anything wrong, it spits it back out for you to fix. (I have never tried voting for two presidents just to check their error trapping.)
One big questions is, "How do you enforce what has been legislated?"
Who will be responsible for finding and persecuting spammers? Current agencies (ie. police, District Attorney, etc.) are already busy enough with more important issues.
My guess is that most spammers are already breaking some laws (truth in advertising, anti-scam laws, etc.). If no one is enforcing the existing laws who will enforce new laws?
For example, sending unsolicited faxes is illegal, and has been for a long time, but lots of people still do it. Why? because no one is enforcing the law.
Re:Former perl, python, java geek gone to Ruby
on
Ruby 1.8.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
I also have a question. I am a die hard Perl fan. I like Perl, because it is fast, flexible, and powerful. The only thing that really irritates me about Perl is its lack of descent OO.
From all I have read about Ruby, it is flexible and clearly OO, but what about speed. Most of my Perl scripts are for text manipulation. I have seen some benchmarks where Perl has beaten out compiled languages in text manipulation. Where does Ruby fall in the speed spectrum? I did some searching on Google, but the only benchmarks I could find were old or very limited.
The reason is that it's hard to get the insight until you understand the mechanics
I agree, I just finished 3 years of college level Calculus and Differential Equations. I found that I didn't really get Calc I until I was in Calc II and it didn't all come together until Calc III. Grade wise I did great in all three, but the 'why' of it all took a while to build. The more you use/practice it the more you will begin to connect the concepts and really understand.
All that said, don't be discouraged from trying. I think a lot of learning comes down to your approach and attitude. When I study math I am constantly looking for 'how does this apply in the real world' and 'how does this fit with the math rules I know'. <rabit trail>The second is really important, there is a very exact framework of math laws, if you know the laws and can apply them, then you can hang everything you learn on that framework and it will make sense. Another tip: when the teacher is doing a proof don't space out, instead try and think ahead and predict where the teacher/author is going next with the proof.</rabit trail>. I sat through lectures and had everything make sense, but had friends come out of the same lecture and be totally lost. It is because they are looking to just pass, not to really dig in and understand.
Now, as far as books go, the only ones I really know are the textbooks I have used. If you are looking for algebra try Saxon math (These text books are very popular with home schoolers, and for good reason). After a couple years with Saxon (Algebra 1/2, Algebra I, and Algebra II) I moved on to advanced high school math with text books published by University of Chicago. I thought both Saxon and U. of C. were good. I can't really recommend my college level text books. They are not too good, almost all I have learned I got from lecture. <rabit trail> People learn different, if you learn well from lectures it might be best for you to look for night classes at a community college. On the other hand, you may learn better from reading, in which case the classes would be a waste of time</rabit trail>
Whatever you decide, best of luck to you, and remember, take the bull by the horns and CHOSE to enjoy it. No matter how good the book / teacher is, whether you learn or not really comes down to how you choose to approach it.
The Textus Receptus was created in 1518 by Desiderius Erasmus
That statement is actually misleading. The "Textus Receptus" was based on Erasmus' version, but was revised many times (Erasmus also revised his own text, multiple times), before it was called the "Textus Receptus". The name "Textus Receptus" comes from a quote in the introduction of Bonaventure and Abraham Elzevir's edition published in 1633 (note this is much later than your 1518 date). Check out This article for the quote.
The truth is that the majority of existing Greek text are remarkably simmilar. There is another Greek text called the "Majority Text" which as the name indicates is based on the majority of available texts. The "Majority Text" is very similar to the "Textus Receptus".
Some quotes from The Majority Text Society: Among these thousands of Greek mss., about eighty-five percent agree among themselves to such a great extent that they might be called a "Majority Text" The most widely read translation in history, the King James Version (KJV), is based on the Textus Receptus (TR), a close cousin of the M-text.
While older, the "Alexandrine-tradition manuscripts" differ quite a bit from the majority of text, which does bring their veracity into question.
But this seems to be the jump in logic that I am questioning. That this "chemical mechanism" can happen does not mean that it is or that humans are the primary cause.
In most global warming / ozone arguments that I read there seems to me to be a large jump in reasoning between 'we have made this happen in the lab' and 'this is THE cause for...' I have seen very few articles where people are actually testing the ozone and the reactions there.
I have the same question.
According to this article,
"Since ozone is created and destroyed by solar UV radiation, there is some correlation of ozone concentration with 11-year sunspot cycles." (article also give a number of other natural causes of ozone layer change). The SF Chronicle said, "Between 1997 and 2000, the average growth rate of the ozone hole has slowed by approximately 7 percent per decade"
That was the exact period of a spike in sunspot activity.
So how can we prove that it was the meager efforts of us humans that made the change, and not just a natural cycle?
2) Ventilation. As long as you're not in Saudi Arabia, air from outside is cooler than what the server room would be without air conditioning.
I grew up in the tropics, most of my life without A/C. You'd be surprised what a box fan (that is what we called them anyway, 2 ft square fans that sit on the floor. They don't use a lot of power.) in the doorway can do. If you want to get really fancy, try and force air circulation: Find two openings to the outside world (ie, window and door or 2 doors). Open one and put the box fan in the other. If you put the box fan in a door put cardboard above the fan (ie seal the rest of the door), so the air doesn't simple circle around the fan.
6) (Illegal in many countries) Cooling with running water. Extremely effective, but a huge waste of water
Or if you don't want to run water, put a large pool of water (think kiddy play pool) in front of the fan. Water evaporating of the surface will act as coolant (same idea as running water, but requires more surface area and doesn't give a constant supply of cold water.)
This is a good idea. If you need to put audio online right away you might be able to modify it a little.
For instance: place a PC with a modem on a phone line, and use the PC as the voice mail system (I have heard of some Perl apps written to do this, but I can't find them right now.) Anyway if the voice mail audio is stored on the hard drive it is a simple matter to push it live.
This seems to me like an excelent solution, because it alows the assitant to use whatever phone he has or is comfortable with.
As the parent post suggests, circulation may be the biggest requirement.
You don't necessarily need cold air from A/C, you just need to keep the air moving.
As an extreme example, I saw a monitor overheat and destroy itself once because someone left a few magazines on top of it and covered the vents. It was not a particularly warm day, there was just no circulation.
t'would be a relatively simple matter to install another radiator outside
This might take a little more maintenance than you would think at first. In Michigan, any external pipes, must be heated in the winter, or they will burst. You would have to continually run some of your hot water to the outside, to keep it from freezing, which would be very energy inefficient. Although I suppose you could take the suggestion, from an earlier poster and add anti-freeze. Although then you are running a highly toxic system through your house. If it ever burst you would have a real mess.
What I really want to know is the actual cost. Seems to me that disipated heat from a computer would be a lot less efficient than a modern heating system.
your limiting factor should be the older IDE controllers in the motherboards
These old controlers can limit more than just the speed. The onboard IDE in the P90 in my back room can't handle HDs larger than about 5Gigs.
So when you start collecting old machines, keep in mind that they need to be new enought to handle your HDs, or you will just end up with more scrap parts on your shelf.
The decline of civilization is not the fault of toys. It is the fault of parents and others who influence our lives.
It used to be parents taught their children to work hard and be responsible. Now children are left to do whatever they want to. There is nothing wrong with fun, but childhood is for preparing for adult hood (ie maturing, learning, etc.).
I am thankful for my dad who took the time to teach me. When I asked for more legos (yes, I had a few), he taught me to weld instead. Not only did he teach me to think analytically and design, he also taught me a work ethic and morals.
Slashdot Mirror
When I first read the parent post I didn't think much of it, but the more I thought about it the more I realized the benefits of re-reading your code.
When I write code I put a lot of thought into the structure and logic flow before I write it. Along the way I try and comment that logic as I go. The problem is the big picture all makes sense to me and I am in a hurry to get all my ideas down.
I often find that when I go back and read my code, my comments are full of typos and often do not comment on the really important things.
Perhaps it would be a lot more beneficial for coders (at least me) to go back and read their own code after a few days. When we write it, the logic all seems obvious, but when we go back and review it after forgetting the whole process we can better comment on it.
He did not ask how to do it or what the laws are, he asked for practical experience.
And as far as being of any interest to the rest of us, many of us here are very interested in legal issues especially as they relate to free trade. While the law may provide for CLEC's, it is reasonable to ask if it is practical for the average company to implement.
Michigan also uses a Scantron like system. After you fill in the circes, you feed the paper into the scanner. I think that if there is anything wrong, it spits it back out for you to fix. (I have never tried voting for two presidents just to check their error trapping.)
One big questions is, "How do you enforce what has been legislated?"
Who will be responsible for finding and persecuting spammers? Current agencies (ie. police, District Attorney, etc.) are already busy enough with more important issues.
My guess is that most spammers are already breaking some laws (truth in advertising, anti-scam laws, etc.). If no one is enforcing the existing laws who will enforce new laws?
For example, sending unsolicited faxes is illegal, and has been for a long time, but lots of people still do it. Why? because no one is enforcing the law.
I also have a question. I am a die hard Perl fan. I like Perl, because it is fast, flexible, and powerful. The only thing that really irritates me about Perl is its lack of descent OO.
From all I have read about Ruby, it is flexible and clearly OO, but what about speed. Most of my Perl scripts are for text manipulation. I have seen some benchmarks where Perl has beaten out compiled languages in text manipulation. Where does Ruby fall in the speed spectrum? I did some searching on Google, but the only benchmarks I could find were old or very limited.
The reason is that it's hard to get the insight until you understand the mechanics
I agree, I just finished 3 years of college level Calculus and Differential Equations. I found that I didn't really get Calc I until I was in Calc II and it didn't all come together until Calc III. Grade wise I did great in all three, but the 'why' of it all took a while to build. The more you use/practice it the more you will begin to connect the concepts and really understand.
All that said, don't be discouraged from trying. I think a lot of learning comes down to your approach and attitude. When I study math I am constantly looking for 'how does this apply in the real world' and 'how does this fit with the math rules I know'. <rabit trail>The second is really important, there is a very exact framework of math laws, if you know the laws and can apply them, then you can hang everything you learn on that framework and it will make sense. Another tip: when the teacher is doing a proof don't space out, instead try and think ahead and predict where the teacher/author is going next with the proof.</rabit trail>. I sat through lectures and had everything make sense, but had friends come out of the same lecture and be totally lost. It is because they are looking to just pass, not to really dig in and understand.
Now, as far as books go, the only ones I really know are the textbooks I have used. If you are looking for algebra try Saxon math (These text books are very popular with home schoolers, and for good reason). After a couple years with Saxon (Algebra 1/2, Algebra I, and Algebra II) I moved on to advanced high school math with text books published by University of Chicago. I thought both Saxon and U. of C. were good. I can't really recommend my college level text books. They are not too good, almost all I have learned I got from lecture. <rabit trail> People learn different, if you learn well from lectures it might be best for you to look for night classes at a community college. On the other hand, you may learn better from reading, in which case the classes would be a waste of time</rabit trail>
Whatever you decide, best of luck to you, and remember, take the bull by the horns and CHOSE to enjoy it. No matter how good the book / teacher is, whether you learn or not really comes down to how you choose to approach it.
The Textus Receptus was created in 1518 by Desiderius Erasmus
That statement is actually misleading. The "Textus Receptus" was based on Erasmus' version, but was revised many times (Erasmus also revised his own text, multiple times), before it was called the "Textus Receptus". The name "Textus Receptus" comes from a quote in the introduction of Bonaventure and Abraham Elzevir's edition published in 1633 (note this is much later than your 1518 date). Check out This article for the quote.
The truth is that the majority of existing Greek text are remarkably simmilar. There is another Greek text called the "Majority Text" which as the name indicates is based on the majority of available texts. The "Majority Text" is very similar to the "Textus Receptus".
Some quotes from The Majority Text Society:
Among these thousands of Greek mss., about eighty-five percent agree among themselves to such a great extent that they might be called a "Majority Text"
The most widely read translation in history, the King James Version (KJV), is based on the Textus Receptus (TR), a close cousin of the M-text.
While older, the "Alexandrine-tradition manuscripts" differ quite a bit from the majority of text, which does bring their veracity into question.
But this seems to be the jump in logic that I am questioning. That this "chemical mechanism" can happen does not mean that it is or that humans are the primary cause.
...' I have seen very few articles where people are actually testing the ozone and the reactions there.
In most global warming / ozone arguments that I read there seems to me to be a large jump in reasoning between 'we have made this happen in the lab' and 'this is THE cause for
I have the same question.
According to this article, "Since ozone is created and destroyed by solar UV radiation, there is some correlation of ozone concentration with 11-year sunspot cycles." (article also give a number of other natural causes of ozone layer change). The SF Chronicle said, "Between 1997 and 2000, the average growth rate of the ozone hole has slowed by approximately 7 percent per decade" That was the exact period of a spike in sunspot activity.
So how can we prove that it was the meager efforts of us humans that made the change, and not just a natural cycle?
2) Ventilation. As long as you're not in Saudi Arabia, air from outside is cooler than what the server room would be without air conditioning.
I grew up in the tropics, most of my life without A/C. You'd be surprised what a box fan (that is what we called them anyway, 2 ft square fans that sit on the floor. They don't use a lot of power.) in the doorway can do. If you want to get really fancy, try and force air circulation: Find two openings to the outside world (ie, window and door or 2 doors). Open one and put the box fan in the other. If you put the box fan in a door put cardboard above the fan (ie seal the rest of the door), so the air doesn't simple circle around the fan.
6) (Illegal in many countries) Cooling with running water. Extremely effective, but a huge waste of water
Or if you don't want to run water, put a large pool of water (think kiddy play pool) in front of the fan. Water evaporating of the surface will act as coolant (same idea as running water, but requires more surface area and doesn't give a constant supply of cold water.)
This is a good idea. If you need to put audio online right away you might be able to modify it a little.
For instance: place a PC with a modem on a phone line, and use the PC as the voice mail system (I have heard of some Perl apps written to do this, but I can't find them right now.) Anyway if the voice mail audio is stored on the hard drive it is a simple matter to push it live.
This seems to me like an excelent solution, because it alows the assitant to use whatever phone he has or is comfortable with.
As the parent post suggests, circulation may be the biggest requirement.
You don't necessarily need cold air from A/C, you just need to keep the air moving.
As an extreme example, I saw a monitor overheat and destroy itself once because someone left a few magazines on top of it and covered the vents. It was not a particularly warm day, there was just no circulation.
This might take a little more maintenance than you would think at first. In Michigan, any external pipes, must be heated in the winter, or they will burst. You would have to continually run some of your hot water to the outside, to keep it from freezing, which would be very energy inefficient. Although I suppose you could take the suggestion, from an earlier poster and add anti-freeze. Although then you are running a highly toxic system through your house. If it ever burst you would have a real mess.
What I really want to know is the actual cost. Seems to me that disipated heat from a computer would be a lot less efficient than a modern heating system.
your limiting factor should be the older IDE controllers in the motherboards
These old controlers can limit more than just the speed. The onboard IDE in the P90 in my back room can't handle HDs larger than about 5Gigs. So when you start collecting old machines, keep in mind that they need to be new enought to handle your HDs, or you will just end up with more scrap parts on your shelf.
Here some articles that might interest you. Global Warming
The Scientific Case against the Global Climate Treaty
The decline of civilization is not the fault of toys. It is the fault of parents and others who influence our lives.
It used to be parents taught their children to work hard and be responsible. Now children are left to do whatever they want to. There is nothing wrong with fun, but childhood is for preparing for adult hood (ie maturing, learning, etc.).
I am thankful for my dad who took the time to teach me. When I asked for more legos (yes, I had a few), he taught me to weld instead. Not only did he teach me to think analytically and design, he also taught me a work ethic and morals.