I'm sorry, but since when is "efficiency" (a scientific concept that can be quantified as the amount of work performed by a system divided by the energy input into it) "business speak"?
They got bod down in russia in winter and they got crushed byt the combined might of the cold and the ruskies.
They weren't exactly the first to make this mistake, either. I sometimes wonder what the modern wolrd would be like if they hadn't been so incompetent.
Yes, it is. I've worked on a project that allowed offline modification of a database by replicating a copy to user's PCs, and it originally used XML as the format for data transfer. We got a 30% speedup by switching to tab-separated variables with a line of metadata at the start of each chunk of the stream. Any technology that costs that much in overhead and provides little or no perceivable benefit is a waste of time. (Of course, if your data isn't relational, this is probably not much use to you, but then... what are you storing it in? XML documents?)
The only justification for XML is that there are a lot of tools out there that work with -- I use it is an intermediate interchange format between different environments because the libraries available make it easy with just about anything I want to access the data with.
Why does every coder that writes a Windows app think it has to run at sartup?
The only things that should ever run at startup, in the background, are: AV, mobo, video, sound, and anti spyware. Anything else is a waste of resources.
Network services -- e.g. I have a POP3 proxy server that does junk filtering run at startup. The program for my wireless network card that scans for available networks and connects to them also runs at startup. These are things that I'm likely to need and don't want to have to start up independently of the applications that use them.
But, you're right, there's a lot of junk that gets put on at startup. A friend recently bought an IBM ThinkPad, and it takes about 3 minutes to get to a usable desktop on it. And that's just the default shit that IBM installed on it!
The Sci-Fi channel Dune movies were actually quite a good adaptation of the books. While the David Lynch/Laurentis version was HIDEOUS.
Note that the Sci Fi channel adaptation was about 5 hours long, meaning they could cover a lot more of the story than Lynch could in his version, which was only slightly over 2 hours long.
Though it could stand on it's own two feet as an unrelated movie.
No, it couldn't. Without having read the book, it was utterly incomprehensible. I had to read the book then watch it again before I finally understood the plot. And, of course, why the film sucked so badly.
As someone who has tried to write in all three forms, I can tell you that radio plays are a lot more similar to screenplays than either of them are to novels.
Besides, the jokes cited worked fine in the TV adaptation, too. Are you going to say that TV and movies are substantially different in this regard too?
"Now in theaters: The sequel to smash hit Waterworld: Fireworld!"
Hey! They could follow it up with Windworld. And, becuse they need to milk the franchise one last time to make up for all the money the first one lost, they would finish with... Earthworld.
My understanding is that it adds the PageRank of the page you redirect to, and applies it to your site. So, you appear in the listing right next to the site you linked to, above it if you have a pagerank of your own to add. If you just copied the content, then you'd end up with your own page rank only, throwing you down at the bottom of the list somewhere...
and unfortunately, the system default is to have Java enabled
err... no it isn't. I had to install Java specifically to get it to work with Firefox, and it isn't installed by default on Windows machines since XP SP1 was released. And this only affects Sun's version, anyway, so it has never been installed by default on Windows.
It is very frustrating that people fall for things like this and those dodgy African "lottery" wins that you didn't even enter.
The reason people fall for the lottery 419s is that they're very cleverly constructed. The message you receive tells you that there's been a problem with their system, and they've had to handle your claim manually. Then they say that they want you to keep it confidential because they don't want to be flooded with people making false claims.
Keeping it confidential is only one of the aims of this part of the message. The thought process it's intended to spur is this one.
1. I didn't enter this lottery. 2. But they've sent this to me because they've screwed something up. They say so in there. 3. They don't want people to know they've screwed up. This is probably because they've screwed up so badly they can't tell who entered and who didn't. 4. So, if I claim the prize, they're not going to know I didn't enter it. 5.... 6. Profit!!!
The problem is, of course, that 5 is where they take your processing fee and then disappear with it, leaving you unable to reach 6.
I believe the first instance of what we normally think of as the tragic hero began with Shakespeare. He was the first one (if I remember my literature classes, now fifteen years in the past) to introduce sympathetic hero characters with a fatal flaw that led to their eventual downfall.
Literature classes often ascribe to Shakespeare accomplishments that were actually achieved earlier by others. This is probably because he is the earliest writer of whom a large collection of work is still available and accessible to the average person without needing to take a language course to understand it.
The extra power and fast charge are great features, but I'm already put off by the $100 + a shot price for the batteries in my current laptop.
Yeah, well, most of that $100 is because laptop/mobile phone batteries are expensive. You can get 6v 50Ah li-ion batteries for not a lot more than that, if you find the right supplier. Only problem is, they're not exactly the sort of thing you could lug around with you. But they'd run your laptop for weeks if you did... Essentially, most of that $100 is because the battery is small and light and packaged in a design suitable for your laptop (which varies from manufacturer to manufacturer, of course). Doubling the cost of the cell technology would probably only add $30 onto the cost of the battery.
Except, of course, that your laptop manufacturer can get away with charging pretty much whatever they want for the batteries, so they probably will.
If you do decide to hire a lawyer and go after Blizzard, expect to pay the lawyer 1000x the difference in the used/new prices of the box -- and probably not get anywhere.
Why on Earth would you need a lawyer? It seems to me to be a very simple case of contract law. Do a little reading and represent yourself.
Seems like the answer to my non-expert self, anyway.
there are even some old closed source projects remaining on sourceforge since before this requirement was put in place
There are? When they put it in place, NASM was forced to move off the sourceforge servers because we had a non-compliant licence at the time; we had to change to LGPL before they'd let us move back.
Right now there are basically three types of open source (or free software) licenses:
* Copyleft. The GPL fits this category, as do a few other licenses like the OSL, IBM CPL, etc. Some of these exist for no other reason than to have something like the GPL without Stallman's rhetoric, but since the drafters weren't careful to maintain compatibility of conditions, you can't mix and match code.
* Copyleft restricted to a body of code; the code can be linked to other code that uses other licenses or is even proprietary. LGPL, MPL (Mozilla), and a whole host of licenses that differ just slightly from the MPL because some corporate lawyer wanted to fine-tune. Where the licenses conflict, you can still mix and match code as long as you preserve file or library boundaries.
* Non-copyleft (MIT/BSD style licenses).
It's worth noting at this point that:
a) you can freely mix with either of the bottom two categories without worrying about licensing. Any open source project can, for instance, include an LGPL library by dynamically linking it, or a BSD library either by dynamic or static linking (as long as copyright notices are presererved), and
b) that effectively the only restriction is that you can't reuse code from a copyleft project under any other licensing scheme. The answer to this is clearly to use one of the other schemes for any code that is intended to be reusable (e.g. the NASM project I worked on, which is now licensed under the LGPL, not because it's a library but because some sections of it could usefully be reused in other related projects, e.g. the instruction table could be useful for people writing compiler code generators).
My understanding of the situation is that the statutory damages are only available if the file was available for other people to download from you (and it is therefore assumed that they did).
They're not just damages for a single instance of copying, but also for the contribution you made to those other people downloading from you.
Hmmm... looking at it, you're right, it's just that my desktop system has it missing for some reason. Not sure why that might be, could be an installer failure:(
I wouldn't have thought so. There _was_ a POSIX compatibility layer in Windows NT up to and including version 4; it was stripped out of Win2K though, presumably because MS didn't want to support it for the benefit of the tiny number of people who actually used it.
Why should it need to be updated? It's an ELF format dynamic loader that shoves out almost all of the work to cygwin to provide the necessary APIs. Sure, if the ELF spec changes, they'll need to update it, but I don't see that happening any time soon.
. It certainly is portable: the CLR is elegant, well-documented and easily could be rewritten (except for maybe Windows Forms).
Definitely except for Windows Forms. There's no way to implement the method Form.DefWndProc without having an underlying implementation of the entire Win32 USER module.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sorry, but since when is "efficiency" (a scientific concept that can be quantified as the amount of work performed by a system divided by the energy input into it) "business speak"?
They got bod down in russia in winter and they got crushed byt the combined might of the cold and the ruskies.
They weren't exactly the first to make this mistake, either. I sometimes wonder what the modern wolrd would be like if they hadn't been so incompetent.
[XML] isn't bad as an over-the-wire
protocol.
Yes, it is. I've worked on a project that allowed offline modification of a database by replicating a copy to user's PCs, and it originally used XML as the format for data transfer. We got a 30% speedup by switching to tab-separated variables with a line of metadata at the start of each chunk of the stream. Any technology that costs that much in overhead and provides little or no perceivable benefit is a waste of time. (Of course, if your data isn't relational, this is probably not much use to you, but then... what are you storing it in? XML documents?)
The only justification for XML is that there are a lot of tools out there that work with -- I use it is an intermediate interchange format between different environments because the libraries available make it easy with just about anything I want to access the data with.
Sure, here you go: SQL db's suck. OODBs don't. You can program your DB in Java or C#, isn't that cool?
I'm not sure how much light you need for a projector, but I get the feeling that one of these might do the job. A little pricy, though.
under .NET structs are always created on the stack
So what happens if I want to return a pointer to one?
Why does every coder that writes a Windows app think it has to run at sartup?
The only things that should ever run at startup, in the background, are: AV, mobo, video, sound, and anti spyware. Anything else is a waste of resources.
Network services -- e.g. I have a POP3 proxy server that does junk filtering run at startup. The program for my wireless network card that scans for available networks and connects to them also runs at startup. These are things that I'm likely to need and don't want to have to start up independently of the applications that use them.
But, you're right, there's a lot of junk that gets put on at startup. A friend recently bought an IBM ThinkPad, and it takes about 3 minutes to get to a usable desktop on it. And that's just the default shit that IBM installed on it!
When will it all end?!?!
In the heat-death of the universe. Thanks for making your contribution to Entropy.
The Sci-Fi channel Dune movies were actually quite a good adaptation of the books. While the David Lynch/Laurentis version was HIDEOUS.
Note that the Sci Fi channel adaptation was about 5 hours long, meaning they could cover a lot more of the story than Lynch could in his version, which was only slightly over 2 hours long.
Though it could stand on it's own two feet as an unrelated movie.
No, it couldn't. Without having read the book, it was utterly incomprehensible. I had to read the book then watch it again before I finally understood the plot. And, of course, why the film sucked so badly.
As someone who has tried to write in all three forms, I can tell you that radio plays are a lot more similar to screenplays than either of them are to novels.
Besides, the jokes cited worked fine in the TV adaptation, too. Are you going to say that TV and movies are substantially different in this regard too?
"Now in theaters: The sequel to smash hit Waterworld: Fireworld!"
Hey! They could follow it up with Windworld. And, becuse they need to milk the franchise one last time to make up for all the money the first one lost, they would finish with... Earthworld.
Hmmm.
My understanding is that it adds the PageRank of the page you redirect to, and applies it to your site. So, you appear in the listing right next to the site you linked to, above it if you have a pagerank of your own to add. If you just copied the content, then you'd end up with your own page rank only, throwing you down at the bottom of the list somewhere...
and unfortunately, the system default is to have Java enabled
err... no it isn't. I had to install Java specifically to get it to work with Firefox, and it isn't installed by default on Windows machines since XP SP1 was released. And this only affects Sun's version, anyway, so it has never been installed by default on Windows.
It is very frustrating that people fall for things like this and those dodgy African "lottery" wins that you didn't even enter.
...
The reason people fall for the lottery 419s is that they're very cleverly constructed. The message you receive tells you that there's been a problem with their system, and they've had to handle your claim manually. Then they say that they want you to keep it confidential because they don't want to be flooded with people making false claims.
Keeping it confidential is only one of the aims of this part of the message. The thought process it's intended to spur is this one.
1. I didn't enter this lottery.
2. But they've sent this to me because they've screwed something up. They say so in there.
3. They don't want people to know they've screwed up. This is probably because they've screwed up so badly they can't tell who entered and who didn't.
4. So, if I claim the prize, they're not going to know I didn't enter it.
5.
6. Profit!!!
The problem is, of course, that 5 is where they take your processing fee and then disappear with it, leaving you unable to reach 6.
I believe the first instance of what we normally think of as the tragic hero began with Shakespeare. He was the first one (if I remember my literature classes, now fifteen years in the past) to introduce sympathetic hero characters with a fatal flaw that led to their eventual downfall.
Literature classes often ascribe to Shakespeare accomplishments that were actually achieved earlier by others. This is probably because he is the earliest writer of whom a large collection of work is still available and accessible to the average person without needing to take a language course to understand it.
The extra power and fast charge are great features, but I'm already put off by the $100 + a shot price for the batteries in my current laptop.
Yeah, well, most of that $100 is because laptop/mobile phone batteries are expensive. You can get 6v 50Ah li-ion batteries for not a lot more than that, if you find the right supplier. Only problem is, they're not exactly the sort of thing you could lug around with you. But they'd run your laptop for weeks if you did... Essentially, most of that $100 is because the battery is small and light and packaged in a design suitable for your laptop (which varies from manufacturer to manufacturer, of course). Doubling the cost of the cell technology would probably only add $30 onto the cost of the battery.
Except, of course, that your laptop manufacturer can get away with charging pretty much whatever they want for the batteries, so they probably will.
If you do decide to hire a lawyer and go after Blizzard, expect to pay the lawyer 1000x the difference in the used/new prices of the box -- and probably not get anywhere.
Why on Earth would you need a lawyer? It seems to me to be a very simple case of contract law. Do a little reading and represent yourself.
Seems like the answer to my non-expert self, anyway.
there are even some old closed source projects remaining on sourceforge since before this requirement was put in place
There are? When they put it in place, NASM was forced to move off the sourceforge servers because we had a non-compliant licence at the time; we had to change to LGPL before they'd let us move back.
Right now there are basically three types of open source (or free software) licenses:
* Copyleft. The GPL fits this category, as do a few other licenses like the OSL, IBM CPL, etc. Some of these exist for no other reason than to have something like the GPL without Stallman's rhetoric, but since the drafters weren't careful to maintain compatibility of conditions, you can't mix and match code.
* Copyleft restricted to a body of code; the code can be linked to other code that uses other licenses or is even proprietary. LGPL, MPL (Mozilla), and a whole host of licenses that differ just slightly from the MPL because some corporate lawyer wanted to fine-tune. Where the licenses conflict, you can still mix and match code as long as you preserve file or library boundaries.
* Non-copyleft (MIT/BSD style licenses).
It's worth noting at this point that:
a) you can freely mix with either of the bottom two categories without worrying about licensing. Any open source project can, for instance, include an LGPL library by dynamically linking it, or a BSD library either by dynamic or static linking (as long as copyright notices are presererved), and
b) that effectively the only restriction is that you can't reuse code from a copyleft project under any other licensing scheme. The answer to this is clearly to use one of the other schemes for any code that is intended to be reusable (e.g. the NASM project I worked on, which is now licensed under the LGPL, not because it's a library but because some sections of it could usefully be reused in other related projects, e.g. the instruction table could be useful for people writing compiler code generators).
My understanding of the situation is that the statutory damages are only available if the file was available for other people to download from you (and it is therefore assumed that they did).
They're not just damages for a single instance of copying, but also for the contribution you made to those other people downloading from you.
Hmmm... looking at it, you're right, it's just that my desktop system has it missing for some reason. Not sure why that might be, could be an installer failure :(
hate to be a pedant, but you can't "breath" air at all, as breath is a noun, not a verb.
Is that an instruction, or is your sentence missing a subject?
I wouldn't have thought so. There _was_ a POSIX compatibility layer in Windows NT up to and including version 4; it was stripped out of Win2K though, presumably because MS didn't want to support it for the benefit of the tiny number of people who actually used it.
Why should it need to be updated? It's an ELF format dynamic loader that shoves out almost all of the work to cygwin to provide the necessary APIs. Sure, if the ELF spec changes, they'll need to update it, but I don't see that happening any time soon.
. It certainly is portable: the CLR is elegant, well-documented and easily could be rewritten (except for maybe Windows Forms).
Definitely except for Windows Forms. There's no way to implement the method Form.DefWndProc without having an underlying implementation of the entire Win32 USER module.