As if they wouldn't have had time to do something about it after he actually died.
It demonstrates them to be in a pretty calculating mind-set at that point in their lives. I understand why they were doing it, but if they had any taste, Allen wouldn't have heard them.
While you are in the atmosphere, you can make hot air out of cold air.
There isn't all that much atmosphere to work with, but I suppose you could make a launch platform a la S.H.I.E.L.D., and you could always try to accumulate velocity while going sideways.
Paul Allen got pretty sick during the early years of Microsoft. According to Cringely, Allen overheard Gates and Balmer scheming to re-capture the portion of the company that he owned:
The bad news isn't that bad; just build an imperative gui and have it pass off computation to the functional code. Building a responsive gui on a single core certainly seems possible today, it will probably continue to be so.
The universe gets offended when things change, so things can't be changed all the way back. You can draw a circle and change things back inside the circle, but you will have to change things outside the circle even more in order to complete the changes inside the circle.
BUT TALKING ON A CELL PHONE WHILE DRIVING IS DANGEROUS!!!
It really depends on how many people they each drag around. If they are dragging 10 people around, the cars aren't going to be all that wonderful (10 people lose a day each way, and realistically, driving a car 1,500 miles costs about $700, ask the IRS, so that's $2,000 for 3 cars and 10 days of lost work for each leg of the trip; if they each drag around a single assistant, that's a lot less work and 1/3 the travel cost).
If you figure that Moore was a big honcho at Intel, and that the pace of advancement in integrated circuits is somewhat dependent on the amount of money being directed at that advancement, you may start to think that Moore's law continuing was more than an accident.
I don't think that is mental gymnastics. If the script was quietly distributed by default in Firefox, I would think Amazon had a legitimate beef with Mozilla, but it is pretty hard to say that a user can't look at instructions on the internet that show them how to translate information on a given Amazon page into a search on TPB (that the instructions happen to be interpretable by a browser, in addition to users, might be a little gymnastic, but I think it makes more sense to treat code as information, rather than as a tool).
There are two types of hardcore pirates. There are the ones who are sharing, and there are the ones who are selling. The motivation of the second group is obvious. If you assume that the motivation of the first group is to obtain free content, their evangelism doesn't make any sense; if you assume that their motivation is to undermine a copyright system that they disagree with...
How much does it really matter? How much of the Java code out there needs to be a great deal faster (on say, a percentage basis)? Of the Java code that does need to be faster, how much of it is not embarrassingly parallel? For people who are doing actual computation for a living, the percentage is probably pretty high, so they will benefit from improved tools, but for most code that is aimed at a user, simply enforcing better coding practices will probably improve responsiveness more (and users are a lot more concerned with perceived speed than actual speed).
I would guess the highly parallel code will end up being treated a lot like assembler, where most people ignore it, some people use it where they know they will benefit from it, and a remaining small group of people obsess over using it for everything.
Having their top decision makers travel by public means (so that they can't discuss things with their staff for large chunks of time) probably costs them just as much, if not more.
The juxtaposition was poetic, but it was still the idiotic grandstanding that is typical of congress.
You just recycle the batteries. It isn't that big a deal. The atoms don't wear out, the molecules do (that is, a stable, reversible chemical reaction is a neat trick; when you are recycling them, you don't need to worry so much about the stable or the reversible anymore, so you can recover the material).
Re:So what does that mean for recent newcomers?
on
Python 3.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
It doesn't matter. First, the changes are manageable. Second, 2.x will likely be well supported for at least another 5 years, probably a decade or more.
They can't automatically indent the code to the proper depth, but they have keyboard shortcuts for indenting and dedenting entire blocks of code (often ctrl-[ and ctrl-]).
I understand what you are saying, that if there were explicit end markers, the code could be automatically indented to the proper level upon being pasted in, but the block handling mitigates the pain. So it isn't as convenient, but the additional mental burden over knowing where to put the code is not significant.
The ugly way to do it is to create a.py3 (or.py2) filetype and associate it with that interpreter.
That won't teach python to import modules with that extension (so things could get irritating if you have complicated imports or your paths are messy), but it will work for creating entry points to scripts.
Mixing tabs and spaces has long been legal. Not allowing mixing is the fix (the problem comes up when someone mixes tabs and spaces with 1 tab = x spaces, and then someone else who has their editor setup to automatically convert tabs to a different number of spaces edits that code).
Not allowing them to appear together is based on it being less painful to require people to fiddle with their editor than it is to deal with the occasional breakage.
Slashdot Mirror
As if they wouldn't have had time to do something about it after he actually died.
It demonstrates them to be in a pretty calculating mind-set at that point in their lives. I understand why they were doing it, but if they had any taste, Allen wouldn't have heard them.
Coal power spews radium and uranium into the atmosphere. It isn't visible or concentrated, so it doesn't receive all that much attention.
A few kilograms from a reactor incident would make a huge mess, but it wouldn't be devastating to much of anything.
While you are in the atmosphere, you can make hot air out of cold air.
There isn't all that much atmosphere to work with, but I suppose you could make a launch platform a la S.H.I.E.L.D., and you could always try to accumulate velocity while going sideways.
I sort of operate under the assumption that the North Korean research program is called China. This isn't a well informed assumption, but there it is.
Paul Allen got pretty sick during the early years of Microsoft. According to Cringely, Allen overheard Gates and Balmer scheming to re-capture the portion of the company that he owned:
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2006/pulpit_20060330_000890.html
What's socialist about governmental transparency?
I would guess that the U.S. government has better intelligence than you and I do.
I suppose that is a crazy assumption to make, but so is assuming that North Korea has assume tech that the U.S. government doesn't know about.
Eventually, all the bins start smelling like Java anyway.
The bad news isn't that bad; just build an imperative gui and have it pass off computation to the functional code. Building a responsive gui on a single core certainly seems possible today, it will probably continue to be so.
The universe gets offended when things change, so things can't be changed all the way back. You can draw a circle and change things back inside the circle, but you will have to change things outside the circle even more in order to complete the changes inside the circle.
BUT TALKING ON A CELL PHONE WHILE DRIVING IS DANGEROUS!!!
It really depends on how many people they each drag around. If they are dragging 10 people around, the cars aren't going to be all that wonderful (10 people lose a day each way, and realistically, driving a car 1,500 miles costs about $700, ask the IRS, so that's $2,000 for 3 cars and 10 days of lost work for each leg of the trip; if they each drag around a single assistant, that's a lot less work and 1/3 the travel cost).
If you figure that Moore was a big honcho at Intel, and that the pace of advancement in integrated circuits is somewhat dependent on the amount of money being directed at that advancement, you may start to think that Moore's law continuing was more than an accident.
I don't think that is mental gymnastics. If the script was quietly distributed by default in Firefox, I would think Amazon had a legitimate beef with Mozilla, but it is pretty hard to say that a user can't look at instructions on the internet that show them how to translate information on a given Amazon page into a search on TPB (that the instructions happen to be interpretable by a browser, in addition to users, might be a little gymnastic, but I think it makes more sense to treat code as information, rather than as a tool).
There are two types of hardcore pirates. There are the ones who are sharing, and there are the ones who are selling. The motivation of the second group is obvious. If you assume that the motivation of the first group is to obtain free content, their evangelism doesn't make any sense; if you assume that their motivation is to undermine a copyright system that they disagree with...
How much does it really matter? How much of the Java code out there needs to be a great deal faster (on say, a percentage basis)? Of the Java code that does need to be faster, how much of it is not embarrassingly parallel? For people who are doing actual computation for a living, the percentage is probably pretty high, so they will benefit from improved tools, but for most code that is aimed at a user, simply enforcing better coding practices will probably improve responsiveness more (and users are a lot more concerned with perceived speed than actual speed).
I would guess the highly parallel code will end up being treated a lot like assembler, where most people ignore it, some people use it where they know they will benefit from it, and a remaining small group of people obsess over using it for everything.
Having their top decision makers travel by public means (so that they can't discuss things with their staff for large chunks of time) probably costs them just as much, if not more.
The juxtaposition was poetic, but it was still the idiotic grandstanding that is typical of congress.
Ah, but they disclaim responsibility for the content of comments.
Clearly, this is airtight protection from any action.
You just recycle the batteries. It isn't that big a deal. The atoms don't wear out, the molecules do (that is, a stable, reversible chemical reaction is a neat trick; when you are recycling them, you don't need to worry so much about the stable or the reversible anymore, so you can recover the material).
It doesn't matter. First, the changes are manageable. Second, 2.x will likely be well supported for at least another 5 years, probably a decade or more.
I claimed that Mosaic was the best browser ever.
The conversation was that the timeliness of a feature matters over the current availability, and I was pointing out that this was absurd.
Cython is a fork of pyrex that is actively working to increase coverage of the language (with the goal of being a standard library).
From what I have noticed, the fork is not hostile, the development goals are different enough to justify it.
They can't automatically indent the code to the proper depth, but they have keyboard shortcuts for indenting and dedenting entire blocks of code (often ctrl-[ and ctrl-]).
I understand what you are saying, that if there were explicit end markers, the code could be automatically indented to the proper level upon being pasted in, but the block handling mitigates the pain. So it isn't as convenient, but the additional mental burden over knowing where to put the code is not significant.
The ugly way to do it is to create a .py3 (or .py2) filetype and associate it with that interpreter.
That won't teach python to import modules with that extension (so things could get irritating if you have complicated imports or your paths are messy), but it will work for creating entry points to scripts.
Mixing tabs and spaces has long been legal. Not allowing mixing is the fix (the problem comes up when someone mixes tabs and spaces with 1 tab = x spaces, and then someone else who has their editor setup to automatically convert tabs to a different number of spaces edits that code).
Not allowing them to appear together is based on it being less painful to require people to fiddle with their editor than it is to deal with the occasional breakage.
When you open a plain text file in Word, Courier New is the default.
It's pretty easy to select the text and change it, but they probably did use the default...