If you've used EDIT on VMS since V5.x (IIRC), you've used EVE, which is TPU with a layer on top.
My basic problem with Emacs, other than the resources it gobbles up, is the fact that it requires LISP. My introduction to LISP back 20+ years ago left me with a very bad taste in my mouth, wondering how anyone actually DID anything with the language. I got the impression, regardless of how many MIT people I've heard from so far, that it's useless. I probably just didn't ever really understand it, I'll admit.
Novell is going to end up with most, if not all, of SCO's assets. There's nothing worth anything to buy which they haven't already lost. Well, maybe office equipment, but that's trivia.
Perhaps it’s largely about the learning curve and what people are willing to put up with voluntarily.
I used to like Emacs for simple things, but for anything complex, I used other technology. Emacs’ interface is not what I would call particularly “designed”. It seems more like it grew and the result is incoherent. It’d be a very good idea for Stallman or whoever is maintaining Emacs these days to rip out the interface and start over.
Yes, my opinion. Deal with it. I prefer EVE, BBEdit, NEdit, and vi in that order. This article isn’t about editor rwars or design, or I suspect we’d all have a lot more to say on the subject.
I went to see this at WSJ.com, and found myself laughing and laughing. I briefly thought, "That's not nice! Laughing at someone's misfortune is not nice." Then I realized, this isn't misfortune, this is KARMA! And it's very nice to see, indeed!
...Proving yet again, that this battle over "copyright" is nothing of the sort. It's a battle over control, and a losing battle at that.
Isn't that much of what politics is about?
I really think this is likely to disappear again without a trace once people explain to the supporters of this measure just what the effect will be. The article seems to do a very good job of that.
I don't recall hearing anything in the definition about the location of center of mass, or of relative masses/sizes. Just that the new planet definition said that the body had to have become rounded through gravity. Maybe I should look for their actual statement.
BTW, can we now consider our Earth/moon system to be a double planet? The moon is a gravity-rounded rock, so by the new definition, it's a planet. What shall we call it now? That follows for all such moons in our system, such as those around Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, and Uranus. Whew, we've got a lot of "planets" now! They really killed themselves once they declared Charon as a planet, IMHO. Opens up the field too far.
Agreed, which says to me that they only believe they'd be able to detect such objects, not that they actually can. That's my theory. IIRC, Jupiter puts out more energy than it gets from the Sun. Is it not smaller than their lower limit? What's the difference between an object like Jupiter and a brown dwarf or star? As I said earlier, what makes a brown dwarf "brown"? What spectrum range defines a star?
What I'm saying is that if it puts out energy, why is it not a star? Counter proposal: is a black hole putting out energy? Is it a subset of "star"? What sort of energy need a "star" emit? How much of this energy? How often? Is a faded old white dwarf still a star? Define your terms, sirs.
If they can define a planet to be any old rounded rock in solar orbit, I can define a star to be an object putting out more energy than it takes in.
I guess it might go up a little today. The horror! The concept of making a profit! Whoa. I don't know if I can handle it. Maybe I should SELL this morning.
Which only proves that it didn't find any, not that such don't exist. Radiation from such could, I expect, be blocked by various other objects or phenomenon. And would probably be hard to see in the first place.
Oh, it's fine when us little people are under surveillance, but God forbid the cops should feel it. I have no sympathy for the "police" who did/do this kind of crap.
How could a meeting of ICANN be anything but among a small percentage of people who use the internet? It's not like ICANN consists of millions, or that it'd be useful if it did. Being a committee, as I understand it, the larger it gets, the stupider it gets, and the harder it gets to do anything useful.
I'm just glad to see that the obvious is being recognized.
There are ways to concentrate the potential friends in particular locations. They're called "meetings". Such as SCA gatherings, or science fiction club meetings. Figure what your interests are and use them as a filter to have only people who share your interests.
Granted, I don't do it much either, but I have an idea how.
Slashdot Mirror
If you've used EDIT on VMS since V5.x (IIRC), you've used EVE, which is TPU with a layer on top.
My basic problem with Emacs, other than the resources it gobbles up, is the fact that it requires LISP. My introduction to LISP back 20+ years ago left me with a very bad taste in my mouth, wondering how anyone actually DID anything with the language. I got the impression, regardless of how many MIT people I've heard from so far, that it's useless. I probably just didn't ever really understand it, I'll admit.
So keep an emulation mode, but give the rest of us something with a shallower learning curve. If you like swiss army knives, you must LOVE TPU.
Novell is going to end up with most, if not all, of SCO's assets. There's nothing worth anything to buy which they haven't already lost. Well, maybe office equipment, but that's trivia.
Perhaps it’s largely about the learning curve and what people are willing to put up with voluntarily.
I used to like Emacs for simple things, but for anything complex, I used other technology. Emacs’ interface is not what I would call particularly “designed”. It seems more like it grew and the result is incoherent. It’d be a very good idea for Stallman or whoever is maintaining Emacs these days to rip out the interface and start over.
Yes, my opinion. Deal with it. I prefer EVE, BBEdit, NEdit, and vi in that order. This article isn’t about editor rwars or design, or I suspect we’d all have a lot more to say on the subject.
I went to see this at WSJ.com, and found myself laughing and laughing. I briefly thought, "That's not nice! Laughing at someone's misfortune is not nice." Then I realized, this isn't misfortune, this is KARMA! And it's very nice to see, indeed!
Disks vs cylinders: http://www.ebaumsworld.com/techtvblooper.html
...Proving yet again, that this battle over "copyright" is nothing of the sort. It's a battle over control, and a losing battle at that.
Isn't that much of what politics is about?
I really think this is likely to disappear again without a trace once people explain to the supporters of this measure just what the effect will be. The article seems to do a very good job of that.
Good answer.
So the definition of a star is an object which emits radiation due to fusion, or which did at one time?
Okay, now I've seen this http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/space/08/18/moon.plan et/index.html article, so I see what you're talking about. I'll have to give you that one. It still leaves the question of what is a star.
What am I saying I don't understand?
I don't recall hearing anything in the definition about the location of center of mass, or of relative masses/sizes. Just that the new planet definition said that the body had to have become rounded through gravity. Maybe I should look for their actual statement.
BTW, can we now consider our Earth/moon system to be a double planet? The moon is a gravity-rounded rock, so by the new definition, it's a planet. What shall we call it now? That follows for all such moons in our system, such as those around Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, and Uranus. Whew, we've got a lot of "planets" now! They really killed themselves once they declared Charon as a planet, IMHO. Opens up the field too far.
Agreed, which says to me that they only believe they'd be able to detect such objects, not that they actually can. That's my theory. IIRC, Jupiter puts out more energy than it gets from the Sun. Is it not smaller than their lower limit? What's the difference between an object like Jupiter and a brown dwarf or star? As I said earlier, what makes a brown dwarf "brown"? What spectrum range defines a star?
What I'm saying is that if it puts out energy, why is it not a star? Counter proposal: is a black hole putting out energy? Is it a subset of "star"? What sort of energy need a "star" emit? How much of this energy? How often? Is a faded old white dwarf still a star? Define your terms, sirs.
If they can define a planet to be any old rounded rock in solar orbit, I can define a star to be an object putting out more energy than it takes in.
I guess it might go up a little today. The horror! The concept of making a profit! Whoa. I don't know if I can handle it. Maybe I should SELL this morning.
Can "dwarves of color" be tossed?
Which only proves that it didn't find any, not that such don't exist. Radiation from such could, I expect, be blocked by various other objects or phenomenon. And would probably be hard to see in the first place.
Of course they don't see stars fainter than the minimum they can see. That seems kind of circular.
And when they say "shine", what do they mean? In what spectrum? To what brightness? Another way to ask this is, what makes a brown dwarf "brown"?
Oh, it's fine when us little people are under surveillance, but God forbid the cops should feel it. I have no sympathy for the "police" who did/do this kind of crap.
Begging your pardon, but to beg the question is a philisophical term. Am I not allowed to use it? I'm just kind of wondering.
How could a meeting of ICANN be anything but among a small percentage of people who use the internet? It's not like ICANN consists of millions, or that it'd be useful if it did. Being a committee, as I understand it, the larger it gets, the stupider it gets, and the harder it gets to do anything useful.
I'm just glad to see that the obvious is being recognized.
Actually, I would have modded that as flamebait. No joke.
There are ways to concentrate the potential friends in particular locations. They're called "meetings". Such as SCA gatherings, or science fiction club meetings. Figure what your interests are and use them as a filter to have only people who share your interests.
Granted, I don't do it much either, but I have an idea how.
Now that should be modded "insightful".
I am so glad I don't have any points today, or I'd be tempted to use them on this thread too.
There's no way to know that for sure if there's no description. I'm pointing an aspiring tech writer at that site.