For years I've had a "Design for use with Windows 2000" sticker on my magic 8-ball at my desk. A couple of years ago it gained a "Designed for use with Windows XP" sticker as well.
"Will the machine Blue Screen today?" (shake shake)
"It is certain".
I quote you again, for your notice:...one big binary number (typically with a lot more digits than a googol).
Let's see, how is 1024 digits (or 8192 digits) bigger than 10^100 digits? OH! It isn't. You said digits, NOT value. And the way english works, your phrase "more digits than a googol", the googol refers to digits, not to the "big binary number". The correct way to state what you meant would be: "...one big binary number (typically with a lot more digits than a googol would have as a binary number)."
I am sorry to interpret your "requirement specification" correctly accorind to English instead of "what you meant". If I was your software engineer, you'd better hope we had this conversation during the requirements discussion.
You say: "All digital artworks can be represented as one big binary number (typically with a lot more digits than a googol)."
Note that there aren't even a googol of atoms in the universe (10^81 is a current estimate), so the artwork has far, far, fewer than a googol of atoms, let alone digits in its binary image representation.
I too used to have this problem until I started using Rollerballs, and now fountain pens. I love them - I have never been able to write faster than with a good fountain pen. I used to be able to write only a page or two before cramping with a bic. Note that the paste ink in a bic plus the big roller take a bit of force to allow the ink to flow out. With a good fountain pen (try a nice Parker Frontier, only about 20-25 bucks - perfect intro to fountain pens) and some good liquid ink (I like Aurora Black), I can write for literally hours woithout cramping. When I try a bic now, I am used to so much less force on the paper that you cannot see the ink when I start to write, and I have to work harder - and consequently develop cramps in about 20 minutes. This from one who can write hours wihtout cramping with a fountain pen.
The fountain pen has made writing so much more pleasurable that I have re-learned cursive just for the beauty of writing in script - and now after a few months can write faster than I ever have before. I have started writing journals in script using a fountain pen, because my hand won't cramp and I have a blast.
Seriously, try a good fountain pen. They kick the BUTT of every ballpoint you will use. And get one rollerball (they also use an easy flowing liquid ink) for plane trips, as the changing pressure with elevation are the one weakness of fountain pens - they will leak because the ink flows so easily.
Most of the TAB sites I go to have responded by removing the lyrics, but not the chords and tab. In fact, they will often have the same song posted with chords in different keys, and other small differences (is that an A or an Asus2?). So, if you have access to the song, you can figure out where they go - the chord labelling is often something like:
Verse: G C G D (x2)
Chorus: G C D C D G
Break: (etc...)
So, even though this is happening, the tab / chord sites are still up, albeit without lyrics.
Okay, it looks like they fixed the graphs, 54 seconds is now at.9 on the scale and 85 seconds is now at 1.4 minutes.
From all the other articles, I thought you all were smoking something, but they must have recently updated them.
The scale at the bottom is right. 54 seconds is.9 minutes (54/60). 1 minute, 25 seconds is 1.4 minutes (1 + 25/60). Don't be so freaked out by decimal minutes, it makes you look foolish.
Okay, some are way earlier - ie, the quaternions were discovered by Hamilton (1843), and his buddy Graves discovered Octonions (1843) (which were origrnally published by Caley in 1845 because graves didn't publish first), and hypothesized hexadecions. It is hexadecions I am unsure about when the algebra was officially formalized as complete.
Yep, you are. Hypercomplex numbers have been around a long time - in 1831, Gauss published an algebra of complex numbers and pointed the way to what later came to be called hypercomplex numbers. As we know them today, they have been is use since at least 1973. Probably earlier, but none of my books reference earlier than a 1973 Russian paper.
Sun Microsystems Press has the best book I've read on the subject. "Better" than the traditional methods is up to your design. If you are spawning MANY processes per minute, on some implementaions pthreads will be much faster. There are some other payoffs as well, but really it comes down to what you are really trying to do...
...and in 1980, a 5MB disk was how many thousands of dollars?...And now 100GB of disk is 10 to 20 times cheaper than that? Not to mention interoperability, standards-based operation, a a lot of other stuff that an ERP system provides that ManMan couldn't. Did ManMan do demand forecasting? Did ManMan manage your supply chain? Oh, wait, business CHANGED! You can figure out more with the additional capabilities available to you now that, if used properly, should save a company a bundle in reduced warehousing and distribution... and so on...
Or, you can go back to the bad old days. With features usually come some complexity, whether this is code size, database size, and/or complexity.
My company has taken to only extending offers to people who have interned with us, provided that the work done was good work... Unfortunately, to intern, you have to have another year (or semester) of school to go...
Honestly, the people we have hired this way have worked out really well compared to most of the "cold hiring" - both parties pretty much know what to expect going in to it.
The moral? Make sure you intern somewhere you would like to work the year before you graduate!
(of course, I wasn't a college-hire here, came in during boomtimes...)
Gelertner wrote all about this in his book, Machine Beauty, from 1999. This is OLD news, some poor reporter just got sucked in. And from reading his book, and playing with the demos he has, I would not be able to stand using his software... Seems like a good idea, but somehow, the implementation feels just lousy.
If I could get a home receiver, I'd buy it.
I don't have a TV. "Cable TV plus radio
channels" is a waste of my money - I don't
want the TV, just the music.
Then again, if my Cable Co offered just the
cable digital radio, I'd be set, and satellite
radio would likely lose me.
It always blows the AT&T broadband rep's mind
- "you have cable phone, cable modem, and no
TV?" Heh.
#include /* mon is 0-11, day is 0-30, year is years since 1900. return is days since sun day (0-6) */ int dweek( int mon, int day, int year ) {
struct tm ts;
time_t t;
ts.tm_mon=mon;
ts.tm_mday=day;
ts.tm_year=year;
t = mktime( &ts );
localtime_r( &t, &ts );
return ts.tm_wday; }
You realize, of course, that NeXT and NeXTStep first came out in 1988? I had (okay, shared) serial number 36 of the first run of NeXT cubes back then when I worked at back at Los Alamos. NeXTStep version 0.6 or 0.7, I believe, was the OS release it shipped with. 'Twas a cool, cool machine. I went straight from PCs to NeXT, Sun, and SGI equipment. From there, been a *nix bigot ever since. Never have had a Mac, tho...
Slashdot Mirror
Very interesting, and makes sense. A good strategy, but still not reassembling multiple packets correctly before redirecting...
For years I've had a "Design for use with Windows 2000" sticker on my magic 8-ball at my desk. A couple of years ago it gained a "Designed for use with Windows XP" sticker as well. "Will the machine Blue Screen today?" (shake shake) "It is certain".
But not because of iPod. Really, a nice desktop, integrated desktop apps, plus the joy of a UNIX cli under it all. Beat the pants of Linux for me.
Okay, there are techincalities here, too. This time I was just being a pain in the arse. Feel free to ignore.
"DNA is at once both the encoding and the playback device."
Technically, RNA reads "plays back" the DNA.
I quote you again, for your notice: ...one big binary number (typically with a lot more digits than a googol).
Let's see, how is 1024 digits (or 8192 digits) bigger than 10^100 digits? OH! It isn't. You said digits, NOT value. And the way english works, your phrase "more digits than a googol", the googol refers to digits, not to the "big binary number". The correct way to state what you meant would be: "...one big binary number (typically with a lot more digits than a googol would have as a binary number)."
I am sorry to interpret your "requirement specification" correctly accorind to English instead of "what you meant". If I was your software engineer, you'd better hope we had this conversation during the requirements discussion.
You say:
"All digital artworks can be represented as one big binary number (typically with a lot more digits than a googol)."
Note that there aren't even a googol of atoms in the universe (10^81 is a current estimate), so the artwork has far, far, fewer than a googol of atoms, let alone digits in its binary image representation.
Check it out yourself.
The fountain pen has made writing so much more pleasurable that I have re-learned cursive just for the beauty of writing in script - and now after a few months can write faster than I ever have before. I have started writing journals in script using a fountain pen, because my hand won't cramp and I have a blast.
Seriously, try a good fountain pen. They kick the BUTT of every ballpoint you will use. And get one rollerball (they also use an easy flowing liquid ink) for plane trips, as the changing pressure with elevation are the one weakness of fountain pens - they will leak because the ink flows so easily.
Most of the TAB sites I go to have responded by removing the lyrics, but not the chords and tab. In fact, they will often have the same song posted with chords in different keys, and other small differences (is that an A or an Asus2?). So, if you have access to the song, you can figure out where they go - the chord labelling is often something like:
Verse: G C G D (x2)
Chorus: G C D C D G
Break: (etc...)
So, even though this is happening, the tab / chord sites are still up, albeit without lyrics.
Okay, it looks like they fixed the graphs, 54 seconds is now at .9 on the scale and 85 seconds is now at 1.4 minutes.
From all the other articles, I thought you all were smoking something, but they must have recently updated them.
The scale at the bottom is right. 54 seconds is .9 minutes (54/60). 1 minute, 25 seconds is 1.4 minutes (1 + 25/60). Don't be so freaked out by decimal minutes, it makes you look foolish.
Okay, some are way earlier - ie, the quaternions were discovered by Hamilton (1843), and his buddy Graves discovered Octonions (1843) (which were origrnally published by Caley in 1845 because graves didn't publish first), and hypothesized hexadecions. It is hexadecions I am unsure about when the algebra was officially formalized as complete.
Yep, you are. Hypercomplex numbers have been around a long time - in 1831, Gauss published an algebra of complex numbers and pointed the way to what later came to be called hypercomplex numbers. As we know them today, they have been is use since at least 1973. Probably earlier, but none of my books reference earlier than a 1973 Russian paper.
Bah! I copied the wrong link, I meant the Klienman book.
Sun Microsystems Press has the best book I've read on the subject. "Better" than the traditional methods is up to your design. If you are spawning MANY processes per minute, on some implementaions pthreads will be much faster. There are some other payoffs as well, but really it comes down to what you are really trying to do...
...and in 1980, a 5MB disk was how many thousands of dollars? ...And now 100GB of disk is 10 to 20 times cheaper than that? Not to mention interoperability, standards-based operation, a a lot of other stuff that an ERP system provides that ManMan couldn't. Did ManMan do demand forecasting? Did ManMan manage your supply chain? Oh, wait, business CHANGED! You can figure out more with the additional capabilities available to you now that, if used properly, should save a company a bundle in reduced warehousing and distribution... and so on...
Or, you can go back to the bad old days. With features usually come some complexity, whether this is code size, database size, and/or complexity.
My company has taken to only extending offers to people who have interned with us, provided that the work done was good work... Unfortunately, to intern, you have to have another year (or semester) of school to go...
Honestly, the people we have hired this way have worked out really well compared to most of the "cold hiring" - both parties pretty much know what to expect going in to it.
The moral? Make sure you intern somewhere you would like to work the year before you graduate!
(of course, I wasn't a college-hire here, came in during boomtimes...)
Weird, I know. Must be the admin assistant. Then again, maybe H4xx0r3d.
Which you CAN read with Mozilla"
Gelertner wrote all about this in his book, Machine Beauty, from 1999. This is OLD news, some poor reporter just got sucked in. And from reading his book, and playing with the demos he has, I would not be able to stand using his software... Seems like a good idea, but somehow, the implementation feels just lousy.
If I could get a home receiver, I'd buy it. I don't have a TV. "Cable TV plus radio channels" is a waste of my money - I don't want the TV, just the music.
Then again, if my Cable Co offered just the cable digital radio, I'd be set, and satellite radio would likely lose me.
It always blows the AT&T broadband rep's mind - "you have cable phone, cable modem, and no TV?" Heh.
Just a little bigger and I'm making a thumper and some Maker hooks...
The spice must flow!
#include
/* mon is 0-11, day is 0-30, year is years since 1900. return is days since sun
day (0-6) */
int dweek( int mon, int day, int year )
{
struct tm ts;
time_t t;
ts.tm_mon=mon;
ts.tm_mday=day;
ts.tm_year=year;
t = mktime( &ts );
localtime_r( &t, &ts );
return ts.tm_wday;
}
You realize, of course, that NeXT and NeXTStep first came out in 1988? I had (okay, shared) serial number 36 of the first run of NeXT cubes back then when I worked at back at Los Alamos. NeXTStep version 0.6 or 0.7, I believe, was the OS release it shipped with. 'Twas a cool, cool machine. I went straight from PCs to NeXT, Sun, and SGI equipment. From there, been a *nix bigot ever since. Never have had a Mac, tho...
I actually had a Be machine for a while, and played with it - nice OS, and well thought out, just a problem of very little applications for it.
Yeah, those little applications bother me too... I just LOVE those big bloated applications!
OHHHHH!!! You meant _few_ applications!