But you missed my point. You act as if "off-by-one error" is some part of the english language or some sort of technical description; something to get right or wrong. It is only a figure of speech. Thus, one way of saying it isn't much more valid that any other. The only difference being that more people say it one way than the other. Both are just as expressive, it is just that one happens to conflict with a figure of speech used in business (not only technology).
The examples that you use are clear-cut cases of correct vs. wrong, this is not.
That's all true, but people still say "one-off error" to mean "off-by-one error".
When I got my second job, and I first heard someone use "one-off" by your definition, I was stumped. It just depends on your background what people tend to say. Although, "off-by-one error" is more descriptive.
He (and friends) have tried that [to repleal DMCA]. They wouldn't go for it. That is where politics come in; they need to go after what they think they can win to slowly take the rights back. Then and only then will more lawmakers understand the evils of DMCA type of legislation.
The war starts with a single shot. You can't not start a war because the first shot isn't going to win it for you. You have to start somewhere, and stating that we deserve to know what we are buying is a good step.
But the problem is, what happens when I want to go to a site in a different language, but the URL has chars that aren't even in my code page? What do I do then? Yes, I won't understand the page, but I can sometimes translate it using tech found on the web; but if I can't even type in the address, it is lost to me. And there is no way I can have all of the characters of all the character sets active at once. What's more, I couldn't remember what those characters were.
My point is that these should have some common denominator when it comes to URI elements. Maybe [A-Za-Z] and - isn't the right thing, but it isn't too bad either.
Yep, I agree with most of this. I say that they either do a good job of policing the tld's, or they just don't bother, making tld's meaningless, which isn't a totaly bad thing, just different.
That is,.edu,.mil, and.gov (forgot one) are not consumer or civilian based tlds. This is my definition, but I find it good enough. Basicly, anyone that can get a tld can choose between.net,.org or.com, they don't really care in most if not all cases.
1. the porn sites aren't going to switch just because there is a.xxx tld.
2. the ICANN can't/won't enforce any kind of consistency for consumer/civilian based tld. (that is, you won't be able to know for sure that a XXX site didn't try to "slip in" with a.com tld)
The ICANN has been asked to create content-based tld before and they have refused because they don't want to play policeman. I for one agree, I don't want them to decide what goes on the web and what doesn't.
Re:Why are people still using a 30 year old langua
on
C
·
· Score: 1
1. I never said malloc/free were "hard real-time", I just said that the programmer could choose when it happens.
2. Because I said something like "this is becoming less of an issue", I had hoped that intellegent people would understand that this is a general comment and not an absolute statement. Yes there are special cases/workarounds/advances, but generally, you make the trade-offs that you feel comfortable with.
Do I think that garbage collection is probably better? You bet, but the point is that the programmer decides everything with the old way (for better or worse) and with gc, the system/library decides. Usually that is a good thing, but not always. (once again, this has been espacally true in the past, but yes, progress continues)
Yep, that gcfaq is interesting, I have looked at it before. The only thing I don't like about it is you get the feeling that they think that anyone who doesn't use gc is just obviously retarded.
Re:Why are people still using a 30 year old langua
on
C
·
· Score: 2
Yeah, consistent, until your app decides to garbage collect. On most platforms, your app stands still, or usually at least gets sluggish. Hopefully, that is a good time, but the bad news is, you have no control.
To be fair, this is becoming less and less of an issue, but still an issue for hyper important/time sensitive apps. With C-style mm, you can decide when to free memory if you want.
Yeah, well, that just proves that anyone can become president in the country. That is, anyone that has gobs of money and family connections. And anyone except someone that is qualified. Also, I think that reflects badly on Yale and Harvard; it is widely accepted that he mostly bought his way through school. (yes, rumors, no proof)
Well, maybe that is true, but the original story didn't make any sense. It was so poorly written, that I thought that something was either typoed or they used the wrong word somewhere. His replacement makes more sense than the original text.
Ah yes, but there is another side to it. College is also about the piece of paper you get at the end, and also, what institution's name is on said paper. This, in fact, is the most important thing to the institution: their name. If they allow cheating (and say for the sake of argument that these are equvalent, so they can either allow cheating or use this service) then their reputation goes down, versus other institutions. When this happens, their status and cash goes down.
Thus, the institution can't rely on pragmatism. They must prevent cheating if at all possible, as it reflects badly on them if a bunch of cheaters (thus, uneducated idiots) graduate from their institution, presenting a piece of paper with the institution's name on it.
It is about time a large company got into this debate that wasn't on the accusing side.
For a long time, some companies (Apple, Sony, HP, Phillips, etc.) gave us tools to "rip, mix, burn" and told us to do so (I'll call them enabling companies), but when these sacks of shit that make up the content production companies complain and whine, these enabler companies didn't have much to say. Now, a big company (with their own healthy PR department/company) can take some of this brunt.
We can now have a debate between equals (or semi-equals, we'll see who else gets involved over the coming months) instead of having big companies attacking consumers for using products in seemingly fair ways (use the PC to rip and mix, and then use a CD burner to make CDs).
So, yeah, it seems pretty stupid and petty, but I think it is high time the enabling companies get into this debate.
Seems like the proposed move from C/C++ based development to something proprietary like C# (or Java, depending on how you look at things).
I foresee problems with stuff like standards (no standards body, just a proprietary company) and licensing issues.
Seems like the W3C just needs to propose something "nextgen" (some kind of toolkit based design like this apposed to yet another mark-up language) to make things move forward, or maybe we just need to stick with the evolving standard stuff like HTML, DHTML, CSS, XML... etc. Just a thought.
Yes, it would be more like CNN reporting that coke really is better than pepsi. You think that surely CNN wouldn't make a call like that, but if CNN says that it is a fact, I guess you can believe it. Right?
Lets see, there is a problem with music distribution, so we decide that we don't want it anyway? That is pretty stupid. That doesn't fix anything. Anyone remeber Aesop from grade school. There was this little story about a fox wanting some grapes, but they were growing too high up for him to reach. The fox tried and tried to get the grapes, but to no avail. When he decided that he was never going to get the grapes, he says "those grapes where probably sour, so I don't really want them," and he left. This is the fable of "sour grapes". This is exactly what this view promotes: there is this problem with something we want, so we will act like we didn't want it in the first place.
Yes, there is plenty of crappy music out there, but, there is always someone out there buying it. Would it get bought if there were a better selection? maybe, maybe not. But saying that nothing is worth buying doesn't prove anything about the current system.
It is a shame that sometimes these "random people" aren't as random as they seem. Sometimes they are your boss or user group. 'Them's tha' breaks', as my dad used to say....
Sorry to reply to my own post. But really, the secret to getting started in the OSS biz (yeah, biz, that's funny....) is to be willing to really get your hands dirty. That is, be willing to fix bugs and such. There are too many people only willing to work on new code. (yes me too) Many projects have too many cooks in the kitchen, too many "neat" little side projects that don't fit into what the main project is all about. Also, they add too many features and the same bugs are listed in each release.
Talk about really making the project lead's day, as for a prioritized bug list and get cracking on that.
Yes, browse sourceforge and freshmeat for interesting projects that need help.
Rarely do you find stuff there that isn't in need of some kind of help. Sometimes, all they need a a little design/analysis work, sometimes they have modules to code. Check it out, you might just make someone's day.
So some percentage of uneducated, non-law enforcing people thing that it would help in solving this? bah. Who cares.
That is like advertising perscrition drugs on tv. Doctors are the only ones that can decide which drugs really need to be perscribed. It shouldn't matter which "brand" sounds better, or has a better commercial. "Such a catchy tune, I'm sure that my [fill in the blank] will be better with it!!" This is equivalent to "I am now scared, so I will do whatever to get that false sense of security back!!!"
We need a panel of experts to decide what would be helpfull. And not just FBI or DOJ experts, but ACLU types, and engineering types as well.
So there is a link to Everything2.com for an explanation of who Kandinsky is, pretty good, since everyone might not know what a Kadinsky painting looks like, right? The only thing strange here, is the page on Everything2 only talks about a coffe house in Amsterdam. You have to go to the bottom and click on "Wassily Kandinsky" to see anything about the painter.
Seems like the editor should check those links before putting them up!
Good thing I already know what a Kadinsky painting looks like.
Slashdot Mirror
#1, just ignore it.
#2, it's moot, not mute
;-)
But you missed my point. You act as if "off-by-one error" is some part of the english language or some sort of technical description; something to get right or wrong. It is only a figure of speech. Thus, one way of saying it isn't much more valid that any other. The only difference being that more people say it one way than the other. Both are just as expressive, it is just that one happens to conflict with a figure of speech used in business (not only technology).
The examples that you use are clear-cut cases of correct vs. wrong, this is not.
Howz that for culture? And they say history can't teach us anything.
Um, history or literature?
(by the way, King Aurthur was fictional too.)
That's all true, but people still say "one-off error" to mean "off-by-one error".
When I got my second job, and I first heard someone use "one-off" by your definition, I was stumped. It just depends on your background what people tend to say. Although, "off-by-one error" is more descriptive.
He (and friends) have tried that [to repleal DMCA]. They wouldn't go for it. That is where politics come in; they need to go after what they think they can win to slowly take the rights back. Then and only then will more lawmakers understand the evils of DMCA type of legislation.
The war starts with a single shot. You can't not start a war because the first shot isn't going to win it for you. You have to start somewhere, and stating that we deserve to know what we are buying is a good step.
But the problem is, what happens when I want to go to a site in a different language, but the URL has chars that aren't even in my code page? What do I do then? Yes, I won't understand the page, but I can sometimes translate it using tech found on the web; but if I can't even type in the address, it is lost to me. And there is no way I can have all of the characters of all the character sets active at once. What's more, I couldn't remember what those characters were.
My point is that these should have some common denominator when it comes to URI elements. Maybe [A-Za-Z] and - isn't the right thing, but it isn't too bad either.
Yep, I agree with most of this. I say that they either do a good job of policing the tld's, or they just don't bother, making tld's meaningless, which isn't a totaly bad thing, just different.
I wish we could fix this mess.
Sigh,
.edu, .mil, and .gov (forgot one) are not consumer or civilian based tlds. This is my definition, but I find it good enough. Basicly, anyone that can get a tld can choose between .net, .org or .com, they don't really care in most if not all cases.
for consumer/civilian based tld
That is,
Hope that clears up my points.
Sorry, I don't think so.
.xxx tld.
.com tld)
1. the porn sites aren't going to switch just because there is a
2. the ICANN can't/won't enforce any kind of consistency for consumer/civilian based tld. (that is, you won't be able to know for sure that a XXX site didn't try to "slip in" with a
The ICANN has been asked to create content-based tld before and they have refused because they don't want to play policeman. I for one agree, I don't want them to decide what goes on the web and what doesn't.
1. I never said malloc/free were "hard real-time", I just said that the programmer could choose when it happens.
2. Because I said something like "this is becoming less of an issue", I had hoped that intellegent people would understand that this is a general comment and not an absolute statement. Yes there are special cases/workarounds/advances, but generally, you make the trade-offs that you feel comfortable with.
Do I think that garbage collection is probably better? You bet, but the point is that the programmer decides everything with the old way (for better or worse) and with gc, the system/library decides. Usually that is a good thing, but not always. (once again, this has been espacally true in the past, but yes, progress continues)
Yep, that gcfaq is interesting, I have looked at it before. The only thing I don't like about it is you get the feeling that they think that anyone who doesn't use gc is just obviously retarded.
Yeah, consistent, until your app decides to garbage collect. On most platforms, your app stands still, or usually at least gets sluggish. Hopefully, that is a good time, but the bad news is, you have no control.
To be fair, this is becoming less and less of an issue, but still an issue for hyper important/time sensitive apps. With C-style mm, you can decide when to free memory if you want.
Yeah, well, that just proves that anyone can become president in the country. That is, anyone that has gobs of money and family connections. And anyone except someone that is qualified. Also, I think that reflects badly on Yale and Harvard; it is widely accepted that he mostly bought his way through school. (yes, rumors, no proof)
Well, maybe that is true, but the original story didn't make any sense. It was so poorly written, that I thought that something was either typoed or they used the wrong word somewhere. His replacement makes more sense than the original text.
Ah yes, but there is another side to it. College is also about the piece of paper you get at the end, and also, what institution's name is on said paper. This, in fact, is the most important thing to the institution: their name. If they allow cheating (and say for the sake of argument that these are equvalent, so they can either allow cheating or use this service) then their reputation goes down, versus other institutions. When this happens, their status and cash goes down.
Thus, the institution can't rely on pragmatism. They must prevent cheating if at all possible, as it reflects badly on them if a bunch of cheaters (thus, uneducated idiots) graduate from their institution, presenting a piece of paper with the institution's name on it.
It is about time a large company got into this debate that wasn't on the accusing side.
For a long time, some companies (Apple, Sony, HP, Phillips, etc.) gave us tools to "rip, mix, burn" and told us to do so (I'll call them enabling companies), but when these sacks of shit that make up the content production companies complain and whine, these enabler companies didn't have much to say. Now, a big company (with their own healthy PR department/company) can take some of this brunt.
We can now have a debate between equals (or semi-equals, we'll see who else gets involved over the coming months) instead of having big companies attacking consumers for using products in seemingly fair ways (use the PC to rip and mix, and then use a CD burner to make CDs).
So, yeah, it seems pretty stupid and petty, but I think it is high time the enabling companies get into this debate.
Seems like the proposed move from C/C++ based development to something proprietary like C# (or Java, depending on how you look at things).
I foresee problems with stuff like standards (no standards body, just a proprietary company) and licensing issues.
Seems like the W3C just needs to propose something "nextgen" (some kind of toolkit based design like this apposed to yet another mark-up language) to make things move forward, or maybe we just need to stick with the evolving standard stuff like HTML, DHTML, CSS, XML... etc. Just a thought.
Yes, it would be more like CNN reporting that coke really is better than pepsi. You think that surely CNN wouldn't make a call like that, but if CNN says that it is a fact, I guess you can believe it. Right?
Why can't the people just decide.
Lets see, there is a problem with music distribution, so we decide that we don't want it anyway? That is pretty stupid. That doesn't fix anything. Anyone remeber Aesop from grade school. There was this little story about a fox wanting some grapes, but they were growing too high up for him to reach. The fox tried and tried to get the grapes, but to no avail. When he decided that he was never going to get the grapes, he says "those grapes where probably sour, so I don't really want them," and he left. This is the fable of "sour grapes". This is exactly what this view promotes: there is this problem with something we want, so we will act like we didn't want it in the first place.
Yes, there is plenty of crappy music out there, but, there is always someone out there buying it. Would it get bought if there were a better selection? maybe, maybe not. But saying that nothing is worth buying doesn't prove anything about the current system.
too true. lol.
It is a shame that sometimes these "random people" aren't as random as they seem. Sometimes they are your boss or user group. 'Them's tha' breaks', as my dad used to say....
Sorry to reply to my own post. But really, the secret to getting started in the OSS biz (yeah, biz, that's funny....) is to be willing to really get your hands dirty. That is, be willing to fix bugs and such. There are too many people only willing to work on new code. (yes me too) Many projects have too many cooks in the kitchen, too many "neat" little side projects that don't fit into what the main project is all about. Also, they add too many features and the same bugs are listed in each release.
Talk about really making the project lead's day, as for a prioritized bug list and get cracking on that.
Yes, browse sourceforge and freshmeat for interesting projects that need help.
Rarely do you find stuff there that isn't in need of some kind of help. Sometimes, all they need a a little design/analysis work, sometimes they have modules to code. Check it out, you might just make someone's day.
So some percentage of uneducated, non-law enforcing people thing that it would help in solving this? bah. Who cares.
That is like advertising perscrition drugs on tv. Doctors are the only ones that can decide which drugs really need to be perscribed. It shouldn't matter which "brand" sounds better, or has a better commercial. "Such a catchy tune, I'm sure that my [fill in the blank] will be better with it!!" This is equivalent to "I am now scared, so I will do whatever to get that false sense of security back!!!"
We need a panel of experts to decide what would be helpfull. And not just FBI or DOJ experts, but ACLU types, and engineering types as well.
It's easy to be suspicious of Attorney General John Ashcroft and of the FBI he heads
Yes, it is easy to be suspicious of Ashcroft, but he doesn't head the FBI. That is someone else.
So there is a link to Everything2.com for an explanation of who Kandinsky is, pretty good, since everyone might not know what a Kadinsky painting looks like, right? The only thing strange here, is the page on Everything2 only talks about a coffe house in Amsterdam. You have to go to the bottom and click on "Wassily Kandinsky" to see anything about the painter.
Seems like the editor should check those links before putting them up!
Good thing I already know what a Kadinsky painting looks like.
hehehe, damn spelling.