I tried LeakTracer--works great, but ONLY checks new/delete and ONLY on i386. mpr checks new/delete AND *alloc/free, but doesn't seem to like my multi-threaded app. Neither of these check access violations. I found another one that did EVERYTHING (including telling you where you should put the free/delete) but it required re-writing the app to use their macros.
Just because the experiment doesn't cover all cases doesn't mean the results are flawed. In fact, a "patchwork" of studies that covers all cases with a little overlap is more to be trusted than a single monolithic "definitive" answer-type study.
In any case, how on earth could they get the statistical sample for usage of significantly over 3 years?
As for your third flaw--it isn't even a valid point! Unless it is your claim that people who are "potentially developing" tumor or have undiagnosed tumors are somehow over-represented in the mobile-phone-using group? On the contrary, I would expect that the group that owns the mobile phones is also the same groups that can afford the quality doctors who would find serious health problems early on. In other words, I would expect mobile phone usage to have a mild correlation to people who FIND OUT they have brain cancer--the people who can't afford the phones also can't afford the doctors. -- MailOne
Even if we restrict "modern" physics to Einstein, that's 100 years, not "50 to 75". Let's face it, the reviewer gave us no reason to care about the review and got all his physics wrong. I give it a 5/10. -- MailOne
I haven't gone through the website to see if the details are any good, but the main idea is pure gold. Not in the sense of being good--who knows if 3D UIs will take off. But they are absolutely right (and nearly alone) in understanding that a 3D UI is more than 6 windows on a rotating cube just like a GUI is more than tiled DOS windows.
I've been so frustrated trying to get this idea across that I taught myself a little OpenGL so I could try to implement something...trouble is, all I have is a vague vision, no concrete plan. -- MailOne
I can understand people who think Windows is easier to use than Unix/Linux---I don't agree, but I understand their confusion.
What I don't understand is people who claim that programming under Windows is easier. It just plain isn't true. There are so many "technologies" and "strategies" that you never know how X accesses Y this month. The environment is so unstable and unpredictable that you need a vast array of "test machines" ready to take a clean image so you can figure out if the problem is your program or the underlying (supposedly abstract) operating system. The tools are so feeble (or so localized) that they are virtually useless for any generalized task. I could go on.
Suffice it to say that I got a CS degree in the early 90's from a school that was smart enough to have a lab full of Sparcs. After school I did Windows programming and, having forgotten the "it just works" atmosphere of school, thought that unexplained crashes and hourly reboots were just par for the course. Now I've been programming on Linux exclusively for a full year and it's been heaven. Months go by before I boot my desktop...the servers rarely if ever get rebooted. The "API" is stable, simple and well-documented. It's easy! -- MailOne
I multitask well. In fact, I'm not happy if I have only one "average" task to work on. Depending on the difficult of the task, I can generally handle up to about 4. It doesn't often happen that I reach that limit, but when I *do* (or when one task becomes "non-average" to the extent that I have to drop to single-tasking mode) my technique is: Say no. Better yet, don't even be around to ask.
When I am in the above situation, I sit and concentrate, accepting no input from the outside world. Example: I was working on several tasks at once and the CEO came over and asked a question about the documentation. His question indicated that there might be a serious problem--but I was already working on an "emergency". I said "Freeze. Don't touch anything." (he was doing the docs). Half an hour later, after finishing some tasks, saving my state and checking on his problem, I got back to him.
It's all about knowing how much you can handle and then saying "no" to everything else.
If you aren't like me, though, this won't work. What if you work slow on one task at a time? Your boss isn't going to like it if he can give you one task per month and otherwise has to remain silent around you. Then you have to learn how to multi-task (or simulate it).
[rant] Why is it that apparently intelligent people have no understanding of task-switching? Nearly everyone understands that you can't just do tasks in a random order--you need prioritization. But almost no one understands that you need to prioritize by task importance AND task size. For instance, I'm NEVER to busy to answer a question about how to fix the NT server ("reboot it"). Think of yourself as a process--you have to operate quickly, but you also have to avoid blocking other threads. That sometimes means you have to do work that isn't really yours.[/rant] -- MailOne
"Truth is, Microsoft has every right to do such an audit."
Comments like this are exactly why I'm voting for Nader on Tuesday. MS has zero right to do an "audit" of a customer. Does Walmart have "every right" to ask you to show them receipts for all the items in your house (just in case you shoplifted some of them)? --
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
I was surprised to find three women at last night's meeting but unsurprised to find that one was the non-technical friend of one of the others. Each of those two was 10 times more social than any other person (including the remaining woman). Unfortunately they were sitting too far during both dinner and presentation for me to talk to them much (and no, I wasn't going to hit on them). --
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
To get speakers, you need members. Speakers don't generally want to come to talk to the 5 guys who live in your dorm and run Linux.
And how do you get members? Basic common courtesy. Pardon me while I go on a rant for a moment: I've only lived in my area for a year so I don't know a lot of people. Last night, I went to a LUG meeting that was a complete disaster (from my point of view). I show up and sit down at the table (dinner first, then speaker). No one asks me my name, no one tells me their name, no one has name tags, no one explains what's going on (even as simple as "once everyone gets here we'll do introductions, etc"). We sit around and try to hear one another over the noise for 30 minutes and then order dinner. Again, no explanation of how we are going to be paying, etc. We eat. At 7:00 we go upstairs and participate in much unexplained activity (handing out tickets for what turned out to be a raffle later, making in-jokes, etc). Speak for a while and then out.
If all I wanted a LUG for was technical information, I'd browse a website on the same topic and save myself the drive and price of dinner. I want a LUG to be a social group--talk about Linux issues, make local connections, etc. I know I wasn't the only new person there because I saw one or two one-off intros going on--but no concerted effort to make people welcome. I felt like I was attending a stranger's wedding.
I'm not a total socio-phobe myself--I was looking alert and interested in conversations, making eye-contact and even contributing comments. But only two people bothered to even ask my name and I'm pretty sure one of them was a new guy. Sure, I could ask names first--but shouldn't it be the function of the LUG to make visitors welcome and not the other way around?
(As a sidenote, why is there always one of those smart-alecky geeks with the nervous sniff and inability to shut up when he is wrong in any group of computerphiles? Somebody smack those idiots.) --
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
I learned a bit about GGI and thought it was pretty neat. Later, I had to write a graphics program so I looked them up again--no new release in over a year. Ummmm....yeah. I see activity on the mailing list, but they don't appear to be putting anything out (or updating the docs on the website).
I used it anyway because I wanted something right away, but I agree with another poster that OpenGL is probably the way to go now. --
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
I see a lot of responses here about "so he doodles on a Palm Pilot and suddenly he's an 'artist', so what". That's a pretty specious argument which is easily torn apart by a counter-argument: "so he slaps a bunch of colored liquid on a piece of paper and suddenly he's an 'artist', so what".
It's not the "he's not an artist" aspect that makes this story uninteresting. It's the fact that this story is no more and no less interesting than if he had used babylonic cuneiform on clay tablets. THAT'S what makes this story boring--it's just like all the others. He hasn't created a new art form or used the Palm in a novel way--he's just done regular old drawing and combined them in a mosaic. His message isn't exploiting his medium, I guess I want to say.
I mean, imagine if he had made something that you could transmit to other Palms and it would modify itself (or the "user/viewer" could modify it). It's interactive, it's distributed--THAT would be new and interesting. --
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
One of my questions was answered and fairly well, including this quote: "If the two great military powers of the last 50 years couldn't keep military knowledge from spreading... what makes anyone think that the government can devise rules and regulations that would keep non-military IP from spreading?"
This is exactly what *I* think--so do I vote for Browne? Unfortunately, I have to still say no. I want Browne to win, but I think a vote for Nader is the only way to get there. Voting for Nader gets across the message I want to get across: Campaign Finance Reform, God Dammit! After that happens, Browne has my vote.
BTW, it isn't really Harry himself answering the questions, at least he didn't answer MY question despite the fact that his nick was "Harry Browne".
PS: If the Republicans get a lock on Congress AND the Presidency, maybe the Democrats will push finance reform in 2004 hard enough that it gets in.
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
Every time the topic of bad RAM comes up I can't help but tell this story:
We had just installed an Exchange server we were rolling out the Exchange client to all the desktop PCs. Unfortunately, no one had thought to ask if they could take it--which many of them couldn't. So we were feverishly digging up all the RAM we could find and sticking it into machines as fas as we could. I happened to find a 32MB stick (glory be!) in an unused PC. I said to my boss: "Hey, I found a big one!" He turns around and asked "Is it any good?" while simultaneously reaching for it, and ZAP audibly discharges static electricity right into the thing. We look at each other for a moment and then I say "Not anymore."
I was wrong, though--it was fine. --
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
No, I don't. That doesn't mean I don't attract stupid replies, just that I don't go looking for them.
"They are talking about the releasing the java.* and javax.* libraries under an open/free license."
They may indeed be talking about this--but it's impossible to tell from Paolini's (quoted) comments. All he says is "open source Java" and "bring open source to Java" and so on. --
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
"Java" can't be open sourced--it's a specification, not a program. So is he talking about releasing the source to their implementation (which would be largely worthless*) or about opening the spec up to everyone to modify like with RFC's (which would be awesome)?
My guess: Neither one. The guy was speaking at ApacheCon, he was just using "Open Source" as a buzzword. At best, we'll see the source code of some (not all) of their implementation.
*Obviously this would provide immediate help to projects like Kaffe, but it wouldn't be all that useful long-term. --
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
Relocating the emissions can be a good thing, even if they (temporarily) increase. Right now, all the emissions are from "non-point sources"--meaning from cars that are zooming around everywhere. But if all the emissions could be centralized into a few power plants, it's a LOT easier to apply some emission reducing technology to the problem. Just think about the logistics (and legalistics) of making all car drivers install some kind of filter or post-processor compared to doing the same for a few power plant owners.
Furthermore, it modularizes the problem. Instead of having to come up with an engine for a car (which has to be small, high-power, light, and various other characteristics that vary by car) you can extract all those issues to the power plant where size, weight, cost, etc aren't as important. Imagine, for simplicity, that we were all driving electric cars but that our electric infrastructure was coal-based. Just replace those coal-plants with fusion plants (or solar, or whatever) and the change is transparent to the rest of society.
This is just like putting wrapper calls around malloc/free--you have all the same memory management issues to deal with, but in only one location. --
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
The downsides of an air powered car:
on
Air-Powered Cars
·
· Score: 5
1) The constant farting sound of air blowing out the back end
2) Can't steer, car just flys around the room
3) High internal pressure means that exiting car too rapidly causes "explosive decompression"
4) After car has run for several hours, outer surface gets all wrinkly
...when I was eating a rabbit, raw. What if we hand some means of harnessing the power of fire? Then I could hold my meat over the flames until it had become "cooked" (a word I just now invented). Hopefully this will be tasty, not to mention more hygenic.
They are using our bandwidth to send personal mail--so we should be allowed to read it!
They are using our phone system to make personal calls--so we should be allowed to listen in!
They are using our parking lot to park their cars--so we should be allowed to search them!
They are using our plumbing to take personal dumps--so we should be allowed to watch!
They are using our lighting to illuminate personal activities--so we should be allowed to monitor!
They are using our air molecules to vibrate with personal spoken messages--so we should be allowed to eavesdrop!
All of these things are "environmental". Presumably there is value to the company to provide them to all employees. If an individual employee is being unproductive, fire him. There's no need to read his mail, search his car or test him for drugs. If the mail system (or parking lot) as a whole is costing more than it provides, de-install it. There's no need to read everyone's mail or search everyone's cars.
Remember during the Olympics and how everyone squawked about how the FBI was reading the email from the kiosks? But the kiosks belong to some company or government--can't they do what they want? I'm using my ISP's bandwidth, does that mean they can cc all my mail to the FBI? No, dammit! --
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
Why aren't these people being judged on their productivity? You pay them X dollars (or pounds, in this case). They produce results worth Y. If Y is greater than X, they are an asset. If Y is less than X they should be fired. (Alternatively, you could say "Your Y is less than X, we will have to fire you if this doesn't change in 3 month" and let the employee decide whether to bump up the ol' productivity).
(Don't bother bringing up "porn == sexual harassment" because that is orthogonal to tracking and mail-opening)
Now, I realize that tracking an employee's worth in actual dollar figures can be difficult, but any manager worth a damn knows if she is getting bang for the buck out of her employees. Telling an employee that he should spend his 15 minute coffee breaks in the break room reading a book as opposed to emailing his wife to complain about his cow-orkers is just micro-management. --
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
The 30 watt (equivalent) bulb is $190. I was going to scoff about how that was WAY to expensive but then I did the math:
Assume I live for 50 more years. Further assume that I have the light on 8 hours/day, 365 days/year. That's 2920 hours/year * 30 watts = ~87kWh/year. Times 50 years is 4380kWh. Multiplied by, say, $.06/kWh is $260! Add the money for the bulbs themselves (which keep burning out) and we are talking about $300 for lifetime use of a single bulb! (unless someone points out the sure-to-exist flaws in the above)
The LED bulb uses 1/10th the power so the 50 year cost must be $26 added to the $190 one time cost is just $220.
Problems, though:
1) I couldn't find anything higher than a 30 watt (equiv) bulb on their site. Does nothing higher exist?
2) The cost isn't amortized over my lifetime. This causes two subproblems:
a) If I move, I better take the bulbs with me or I don't reap the savings
b) The cost is all upfront--meaning I have to buy costly bulbs when I am young and (certainly) poor so I can save money when I am old and (hopefully) rich.
Therefore, prediction: Until using LEDs becomes either cheap or mandatory, only ultra-enviro's will be using them. --
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
The recent Linux Journal articles on the topic of building your own PC, plus my "need" for a new desktop have made me kind of interested in building my next PC from scratch (possibly as a dual processor). However, looking at all the information and sites devoted to dissecting CPUs and motherboards have left me feeling...inadequate. Is there a site that lays out, for a Certified Hardware Moron(tm) like me, what terms like "Socket 7" and "Slot A" mean, what the relative merits are, how to pick (or even identify) processors that can run in a dual configuration, what all the hubbub about RAM is, etc? --
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
The topic is: "Should Slashdot be held to the same standards as other news orgs". Your first level comment was "but other orgs are crap". Someone responded to you with "and Slashdot ain't so hot either" which you called "ducking the issue". No, actually it's bringing YOU back ontopic. The question isn't "How well does 'traditional mass media' meet journalistic standards", the question is "How well does Slashdot do?". Pointing to the other guy is never an excuse for your own behavior. Trying to sidetrack a discussion of Slashdot's ethics into a discussion of your stereotypical views of other media ethics, while not surprising coming from Katz, is off-topic.
The simple fact is, Slashdot does a LOT of things wrong how well this compares to ZDNet is irrelevant. However, it IS useful to compare to orgs that do a GOOD job. Like Linux Weekly News. Like NPR (.org). Like some of the "employee owned newspapers" the previous poster mentioned (and you misread as "community owned sites").
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh the day when we see a java advocacy response on slashdot that goes farther than "nuh-uh, it is *so* fast"
--
MailOne
I tried LeakTracer--works great, but ONLY checks new/delete and ONLY on i386. mpr checks new/delete AND *alloc/free, but doesn't seem to like my multi-threaded app. Neither of these check access violations. I found another one that did EVERYTHING (including telling you where you should put the free/delete) but it required re-writing the app to use their macros.
Powerful vs simple. Pick one.
--
MailOne
Just because the experiment doesn't cover all cases doesn't mean the results are flawed. In fact, a "patchwork" of studies that covers all cases with a little overlap is more to be trusted than a single monolithic "definitive" answer-type study.
In any case, how on earth could they get the statistical sample for usage of significantly over 3 years?
As for your third flaw--it isn't even a valid point! Unless it is your claim that people who are "potentially developing" tumor or have undiagnosed tumors are somehow over-represented in the mobile-phone-using group? On the contrary, I would expect that the group that owns the mobile phones is also the same groups that can afford the quality doctors who would find serious health problems early on. In other words, I would expect mobile phone usage to have a mild correlation to people who FIND OUT they have brain cancer--the people who can't afford the phones also can't afford the doctors.
--
MailOne
Even if we restrict "modern" physics to Einstein, that's 100 years, not "50 to 75". Let's face it, the reviewer gave us no reason to care about the review and got all his physics wrong. I give it a 5/10.
--
MailOne
I haven't gone through the website to see if the details are any good, but the main idea is pure gold. Not in the sense of being good--who knows if 3D UIs will take off. But they are absolutely right (and nearly alone) in understanding that a 3D UI is more than 6 windows on a rotating cube just like a GUI is more than tiled DOS windows.
I've been so frustrated trying to get this idea across that I taught myself a little OpenGL so I could try to implement something...trouble is, all I have is a vague vision, no concrete plan.
--
MailOne
I can understand people who think Windows is easier to use than Unix/Linux---I don't agree, but I understand their confusion.
What I don't understand is people who claim that programming under Windows is easier. It just plain isn't true. There are so many "technologies" and "strategies" that you never know how X accesses Y this month. The environment is so unstable and unpredictable that you need a vast array of "test machines" ready to take a clean image so you can figure out if the problem is your program or the underlying (supposedly abstract) operating system. The tools are so feeble (or so localized) that they are virtually useless for any generalized task. I could go on.
Suffice it to say that I got a CS degree in the early 90's from a school that was smart enough to have a lab full of Sparcs. After school I did Windows programming and, having forgotten the "it just works" atmosphere of school, thought that unexplained crashes and hourly reboots were just par for the course. Now I've been programming on Linux exclusively for a full year and it's been heaven. Months go by before I boot my desktop...the servers rarely if ever get rebooted. The "API" is stable, simple and well-documented. It's easy!
--
MailOne
I live in NH but apparently all my news stations are broadcast from MA. Interesting results in a Congressional seat:
Democrat (Kennedy, duh): 74%
Republican: 13%
Libertarian: 12%
Wow! That's the kind of numbers that get parties and issues noticed!
--
MailOne
I multitask well. In fact, I'm not happy if I have only one "average" task to work on. Depending on the difficult of the task, I can generally handle up to about 4. It doesn't often happen that I reach that limit, but when I *do* (or when one task becomes "non-average" to the extent that I have to drop to single-tasking mode) my technique is: Say no. Better yet, don't even be around to ask.
When I am in the above situation, I sit and concentrate, accepting no input from the outside world. Example: I was working on several tasks at once and the CEO came over and asked a question about the documentation. His question indicated that there might be a serious problem--but I was already working on an "emergency". I said "Freeze. Don't touch anything." (he was doing the docs). Half an hour later, after finishing some tasks, saving my state and checking on his problem, I got back to him.
It's all about knowing how much you can handle and then saying "no" to everything else.
If you aren't like me, though, this won't work. What if you work slow on one task at a time? Your boss isn't going to like it if he can give you one task per month and otherwise has to remain silent around you. Then you have to learn how to multi-task (or simulate it).
[rant] Why is it that apparently intelligent people have no understanding of task-switching? Nearly everyone understands that you can't just do tasks in a random order--you need prioritization. But almost no one understands that you need to prioritize by task importance AND task size. For instance, I'm NEVER to busy to answer a question about how to fix the NT server ("reboot it"). Think of yourself as a process--you have to operate quickly, but you also have to avoid blocking other threads. That sometimes means you have to do work that isn't really yours.[/rant]
--
MailOne
"Truth is, Microsoft has every right to do such an audit."
Comments like this are exactly why I'm voting for Nader on Tuesday. MS has zero right to do an "audit" of a customer. Does Walmart have "every right" to ask you to show them receipts for all the items in your house (just in case you shoplifted some of them)?
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
I was surprised to find three women at last night's meeting but unsurprised to find that one was the non-technical friend of one of the others. Each of those two was 10 times more social than any other person (including the remaining woman). Unfortunately they were sitting too far during both dinner and presentation for me to talk to them much (and no, I wasn't going to hit on them).
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
To get speakers, you need members. Speakers don't generally want to come to talk to the 5 guys who live in your dorm and run Linux.
And how do you get members? Basic common courtesy. Pardon me while I go on a rant for a moment: I've only lived in my area for a year so I don't know a lot of people. Last night, I went to a LUG meeting that was a complete disaster (from my point of view). I show up and sit down at the table (dinner first, then speaker). No one asks me my name, no one tells me their name, no one has name tags, no one explains what's going on (even as simple as "once everyone gets here we'll do introductions, etc"). We sit around and try to hear one another over the noise for 30 minutes and then order dinner. Again, no explanation of how we are going to be paying, etc. We eat. At 7:00 we go upstairs and participate in much unexplained activity (handing out tickets for what turned out to be a raffle later, making in-jokes, etc). Speak for a while and then out.
If all I wanted a LUG for was technical information, I'd browse a website on the same topic and save myself the drive and price of dinner. I want a LUG to be a social group--talk about Linux issues, make local connections, etc. I know I wasn't the only new person there because I saw one or two one-off intros going on--but no concerted effort to make people welcome. I felt like I was attending a stranger's wedding.
I'm not a total socio-phobe myself--I was looking alert and interested in conversations, making eye-contact and even contributing comments. But only two people bothered to even ask my name and I'm pretty sure one of them was a new guy. Sure, I could ask names first--but shouldn't it be the function of the LUG to make visitors welcome and not the other way around?
(As a sidenote, why is there always one of those smart-alecky geeks with the nervous sniff and inability to shut up when he is wrong in any group of computerphiles? Somebody smack those idiots.)
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
I learned a bit about GGI and thought it was pretty neat. Later, I had to write a graphics program so I looked them up again--no new release in over a year. Ummmm....yeah. I see activity on the mailing list, but they don't appear to be putting anything out (or updating the docs on the website).
I used it anyway because I wanted something right away, but I agree with another poster that OpenGL is probably the way to go now.
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
I see a lot of responses here about "so he doodles on a Palm Pilot and suddenly he's an 'artist', so what". That's a pretty specious argument which is easily torn apart by a counter-argument: "so he slaps a bunch of colored liquid on a piece of paper and suddenly he's an 'artist', so what".
It's not the "he's not an artist" aspect that makes this story uninteresting. It's the fact that this story is no more and no less interesting than if he had used babylonic cuneiform on clay tablets. THAT'S what makes this story boring--it's just like all the others. He hasn't created a new art form or used the Palm in a novel way--he's just done regular old drawing and combined them in a mosaic. His message isn't exploiting his medium, I guess I want to say.
I mean, imagine if he had made something that you could transmit to other Palms and it would modify itself (or the "user/viewer" could modify it). It's interactive, it's distributed--THAT would be new and interesting.
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
One of my questions was answered and fairly well, including this quote: "If the two great military powers of the last 50 years couldn't keep military knowledge from spreading ... what makes anyone think that the government can devise rules and regulations that would keep non-military IP from spreading?"
This is exactly what *I* think--so do I vote for Browne? Unfortunately, I have to still say no. I want Browne to win, but I think a vote for Nader is the only way to get there. Voting for Nader gets across the message I want to get across: Campaign Finance Reform, God Dammit! After that happens, Browne has my vote.
BTW, it isn't really Harry himself answering the questions, at least he didn't answer MY question despite the fact that his nick was "Harry Browne".
PS: If the Republicans get a lock on Congress AND the Presidency, maybe the Democrats will push finance reform in 2004 hard enough that it gets in.
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
Every time the topic of bad RAM comes up I can't help but tell this story:
We had just installed an Exchange server we were rolling out the Exchange client to all the desktop PCs. Unfortunately, no one had thought to ask if they could take it--which many of them couldn't. So we were feverishly digging up all the RAM we could find and sticking it into machines as fas as we could. I happened to find a 32MB stick (glory be!) in an unused PC. I said to my boss: "Hey, I found a big one!" He turns around and asked "Is it any good?" while simultaneously reaching for it, and ZAP audibly discharges static electricity right into the thing. We look at each other for a moment and then I say "Not anymore."
I was wrong, though--it was fine.
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
"While you consistently post as a troll..."
No, I don't. That doesn't mean I don't attract stupid replies, just that I don't go looking for them.
"They are talking about the releasing the java.* and javax.* libraries under an open/free license."
They may indeed be talking about this--but it's impossible to tell from Paolini's (quoted) comments. All he says is "open source Java" and "bring open source to Java" and so on.
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
"Java" can't be open sourced--it's a specification, not a program. So is he talking about releasing the source to their implementation (which would be largely worthless*) or about opening the spec up to everyone to modify like with RFC's (which would be awesome)?
My guess: Neither one. The guy was speaking at ApacheCon, he was just using "Open Source" as a buzzword. At best, we'll see the source code of some (not all) of their implementation.
*Obviously this would provide immediate help to projects like Kaffe, but it wouldn't be all that useful long-term.
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
Relocating the emissions can be a good thing, even if they (temporarily) increase. Right now, all the emissions are from "non-point sources"--meaning from cars that are zooming around everywhere. But if all the emissions could be centralized into a few power plants, it's a LOT easier to apply some emission reducing technology to the problem. Just think about the logistics (and legalistics) of making all car drivers install some kind of filter or post-processor compared to doing the same for a few power plant owners.
Furthermore, it modularizes the problem. Instead of having to come up with an engine for a car (which has to be small, high-power, light, and various other characteristics that vary by car) you can extract all those issues to the power plant where size, weight, cost, etc aren't as important. Imagine, for simplicity, that we were all driving electric cars but that our electric infrastructure was coal-based. Just replace those coal-plants with fusion plants (or solar, or whatever) and the change is transparent to the rest of society.
This is just like putting wrapper calls around malloc/free--you have all the same memory management issues to deal with, but in only one location.
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
1) The constant farting sound of air blowing out the back end
2) Can't steer, car just flys around the room
3) High internal pressure means that exiting car too rapidly causes "explosive decompression"
4) After car has run for several hours, outer surface gets all wrinkly
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
...when I was eating a rabbit, raw. What if we hand some means of harnessing the power of fire? Then I could hold my meat over the flames until it had become "cooked" (a word I just now invented). Hopefully this will be tasty, not to mention more hygenic.
Seriously, dude, this idea is OLD OLD OLD. Like, 20 years-style old (at least). Here's a link that lists (among other things) some ride sharing databases. Plus, if you've ever been outside you've probably noticed the "Ride Share Info" roadside signs with a phone number to dial for the exact same information. Then there's the many, many companies that provide vans or cars and keep lists of the same thing, and the publications (local papers, etc) that ALSO do the same thing.
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
They are using our bandwidth to send personal mail--so we should be allowed to read it!
They are using our phone system to make personal calls--so we should be allowed to listen in!
They are using our parking lot to park their cars--so we should be allowed to search them!
They are using our plumbing to take personal dumps--so we should be allowed to watch!
They are using our lighting to illuminate personal activities--so we should be allowed to monitor!
They are using our air molecules to vibrate with personal spoken messages--so we should be allowed to eavesdrop!
All of these things are "environmental". Presumably there is value to the company to provide them to all employees. If an individual employee is being unproductive, fire him. There's no need to read his mail, search his car or test him for drugs. If the mail system (or parking lot) as a whole is costing more than it provides, de-install it. There's no need to read everyone's mail or search everyone's cars.
Remember during the Olympics and how everyone squawked about how the FBI was reading the email from the kiosks? But the kiosks belong to some company or government--can't they do what they want? I'm using my ISP's bandwidth, does that mean they can cc all my mail to the FBI? No, dammit!
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
Why aren't these people being judged on their productivity? You pay them X dollars (or pounds, in this case). They produce results worth Y. If Y is greater than X, they are an asset. If Y is less than X they should be fired. (Alternatively, you could say "Your Y is less than X, we will have to fire you if this doesn't change in 3 month" and let the employee decide whether to bump up the ol' productivity).
(Don't bother bringing up "porn == sexual harassment" because that is orthogonal to tracking and mail-opening)
Now, I realize that tracking an employee's worth in actual dollar figures can be difficult, but any manager worth a damn knows if she is getting bang for the buck out of her employees. Telling an employee that he should spend his 15 minute coffee breaks in the break room reading a book as opposed to emailing his wife to complain about his cow-orkers is just micro-management.
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
The 30 watt (equivalent) bulb is $190. I was going to scoff about how that was WAY to expensive but then I did the math:
Assume I live for 50 more years. Further assume that I have the light on 8 hours/day, 365 days/year. That's 2920 hours/year * 30 watts = ~87kWh/year. Times 50 years is 4380kWh. Multiplied by, say, $.06/kWh is $260! Add the money for the bulbs themselves (which keep burning out) and we are talking about $300 for lifetime use of a single bulb! (unless someone points out the sure-to-exist flaws in the above)
The LED bulb uses 1/10th the power so the 50 year cost must be $26 added to the $190 one time cost is just $220.
Problems, though:
1) I couldn't find anything higher than a 30 watt (equiv) bulb on their site. Does nothing higher exist?
2) The cost isn't amortized over my lifetime. This causes two subproblems:
a) If I move, I better take the bulbs with me or I don't reap the savings
b) The cost is all upfront--meaning I have to buy costly bulbs when I am young and (certainly) poor so I can save money when I am old and (hopefully) rich.
Therefore, prediction: Until using LEDs becomes either cheap or mandatory, only ultra-enviro's will be using them.
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
The recent Linux Journal articles on the topic of building your own PC, plus my "need" for a new desktop have made me kind of interested in building my next PC from scratch (possibly as a dual processor). However, looking at all the information and sites devoted to dissecting CPUs and motherboards have left me feeling...inadequate. Is there a site that lays out, for a Certified Hardware Moron(tm) like me, what terms like "Socket 7" and "Slot A" mean, what the relative merits are, how to pick (or even identify) processors that can run in a dual configuration, what all the hubbub about RAM is, etc?
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.
The topic is: "Should Slashdot be held to the same standards as other news orgs". Your first level comment was "but other orgs are crap". Someone responded to you with "and Slashdot ain't so hot either" which you called "ducking the issue". No, actually it's bringing YOU back ontopic. The question isn't "How well does 'traditional mass media' meet journalistic standards", the question is "How well does Slashdot do?". Pointing to the other guy is never an excuse for your own behavior. Trying to sidetrack a discussion of Slashdot's ethics into a discussion of your stereotypical views of other media ethics, while not surprising coming from Katz, is off-topic.
The simple fact is, Slashdot does a LOT of things wrong how well this compares to ZDNet is irrelevant. However, it IS useful to compare to orgs that do a GOOD job. Like Linux Weekly News. Like NPR (.org). Like some of the "employee owned newspapers" the previous poster mentioned (and you misread as "community owned sites").
--
An abstained vote is a vote for Bush and Gore.