Point number 1: is a very active and helpfull set of forums on www.slackware.com. And since Slack is a "do-it-yourself" distro, the people who read the Slackware forums are VERY knowledgable and helpfull. Point number 2: is that it works. Perhaps moot, but it's worth mentioning. I've had slack machines running with 1 year uptime. It's on my laptop, desktop, firewall, and I use it at work as a terminal server. Point number 3: is that it is a do it yourself distro. You may not like it at first. But sooner or later you'll want a CVS version of something, or a binary with non-standard options compiled in, or a program for which an RPM is not available and you are going to have to compile and manage that package yourself. In the mean time you can find lots of slackware packages at linuxmafia.org if you really need them.
I have tried the following distro's (multiple versions of most): Mandrake, Debian, Red Hat, SuSE, TurboLinux, Corel, Storm, and probably some others I'm forgetting. Personally, out of these, I prefer Slackware.
Anyway, it seems your move to Linux is more a move away from NT. Why to Linux specifically?
Or you could patent the idea of patenting the idea of running a computer program to generate patentable ideas. Unless their computer already thought of that.
No it's not. But with Ruby you don't have to.
If you want to see big savings download Ruby. Then compare any library with it's Perl counterpart. Almost always the Ruby source is smaller and more readable. The reason is because of a cummulative effect of these "insignificant improvements".
Let's pretend you were writing an "rcurses" library.
Need a line of 20 "-". No problem.
Anyway, from now on we'll all contact you before adding a feature to a language.
Well, if you are constantly hassled by more codebase to use (more to learn, more bloat to be added), better development tools (that take more time to learn than the time
you might save), more documentation (for new products that does exactly the same as the old products, except everything is different), how are you supposed to get the
time to work? When are you going to sit down and simply hack?
Yes you're right. Keep it simple and complete. Thats why I code in brainfuck. That way I can get started faster than the Java developer using JBuilder. I'm bound to be more productive right?
Besides, I doubt more shit means better jobs. A good job is somewhere where you can simply do your thing, and get paid for it, not somewhere where you will have to
incorporate every buzzword in a project description to be able to get something done (even if you get paid more). Let's face it, new doesn't mean better. For what it does,
Fortran is a great language. It lets you get things done.
Agreed. I'm just saying more perl users --> more perl jobs --> more perl users.
And if you really believe open source will magically give you faster development, then you really need a reality check. While it might be true of some specific projects, it is
certainly not a universal truth. Put 3-5 fulltime developers on a project, or 100 student hobbyists and watch who can keep up with deadlines. Open source certainly has
some benefits (especially for the customer), but it is certainly not a silber bullet.
I'm not saying open source gives faster development, period. I'm saying open source Java development moves faster than open source Ruby development mainly because there are are more Java coders. If a language is growing it makes sense to jump on "the bandwagon" to reap the rewards. And if that isn't clear enough, I'll state it more clearly.
Ruby is a well designed, very easy to learn, language. It's userbase is growing. "Jumping on the bandwagon" will have many advantages.
Re:Another Scripting Language, Ho Hum
on
Why not Ruby?
·
· Score: 1
the bandwagon?
Being on the bandwagon is what gives you more codebase to use, better development tools, more documentation/faqs/books, better jobs, faster development with open source, etc...
I'm on the bandwagon.
And now "average joe" (or my parents) who's "computer buddy" (me) installed Napster will see this and also stop using Napster. Think their user base will shrink by 50% again?
I can just as easily create a piece of software and say "for use on closed source, proprietary OSs only". Not that I would, but say a corporation didn't wan't you using wine to run their apps...
...but if you think
companies sit on their hands on large and lucractive markets where such an opportunity is clearly exploitable you're only
kidding yourself. So it's more lucrative to charge a person once rather than weekly for the rest of their lives? I can't see how that's possible. In answer to the italicised comment, I don't think companies sit on their hands when an opportuinity is exploitable. This brings us right back to where I started.
Pharmaceutical companies. companies companies companies companies. Do you what that word means? That word is reserved for people in the business of making MONEY. They have stock. They have stock-holders. If they forget that they are around to make money, they dissapear. How about coder? That word is reserved for one who writes code. In no way does it evince to the motives behind the coding. Give me a better example please.
Oh I forgot. It's the researchers who write themselves the paycheks, and who pay off the AMA and decide where Pfietzer or whoever is going to spend their money. That's like saying a developer at Microsoft want's to take his time and write clean reliable code.
A lot of diseases are viral, genetic, or other-wise uncurable... Oh, I guess it's you who's the medical expert. See my post here.
Eventually,
the proponents of
bioinformatics claim, the new field will change health care
by allowing pharmaceutical companies to shave years off
the drug-discovery process, and letting doctors tailor
medicines to an individual's genetic makeup.
Pharmaceutical companies are around to make money. That's why they create drugs that treat symptoms and not drugs that are cures. Now they're investing in ways to make more money from us. Great.
THANK YOU RUBY ADVOCATES!
on
Apocalypse 2
·
· Score: 1
Finally we're seeing some Ruby advocates here! I've been trying to evangalize as much as possible. Ruby is a great language. Sure, it hasn't had quite enough time to mature as Perl has, but it's built on a better foundation. Perl (as we know) is a hack of technologies that are usefull but dated (awk, c, sh, grep, etc...), while Ruby has started with a cleaner state. And now while Perl is being "hacked" more, Ruby is busy catching up... wait a year or two.
...I'd rather have our CGI's readable... You'll probably find that they end up being half the size as well (depending on how large they were to start).
I'm sure this will be modded as (troll/flamebait/offtopic) but it was worth it to express the joy it brings me to have read your posts.
I agree with you that intent is the important part. Even Kant said that the only truely good thing is a good intention (and hence the converse is true as well). I just didn't know that the law saw it that way when it came to patents.
The judge also states that even if Infineon has infringed on the remaining patents, they didn't do so willfully. Don't get me wrong, I hate all this patent shit too, but if someone infringes on a patent, since when does it matter if it was "willfully" or not?
Slashdot Mirror
Point number 1: is a very active and helpfull set of forums on www.slackware.com. And since Slack is a "do-it-yourself" distro, the people who read the Slackware forums are VERY knowledgable and helpfull.
Point number 2: is that it works. Perhaps moot, but it's worth mentioning. I've had slack machines running with 1 year uptime. It's on my laptop, desktop, firewall, and I use it at work as a terminal server.
Point number 3: is that it is a do it yourself distro. You may not like it at first. But sooner or later you'll want a CVS version of something, or a binary with non-standard options compiled in, or a program for which an RPM is not available and you are going to have to compile and manage that package yourself. In the mean time you can find lots of slackware packages at linuxmafia.org if you really need them.
I have tried the following distro's (multiple versions of most): Mandrake, Debian, Red Hat, SuSE, TurboLinux, Corel, Storm, and probably some others I'm forgetting. Personally, out of these, I prefer Slackware.
Anyway, it seems your move to Linux is more a move away from NT. Why to Linux specifically?
Or you could patent the idea of patenting the idea of running a computer program to generate patentable ideas. Unless their computer already thought of that.
No it's not. But with Ruby you don't have to.
If you want to see big savings download Ruby. Then compare any library with it's Perl counterpart. Almost always the Ruby source is smaller and more readable. The reason is because of a cummulative effect of these "insignificant improvements".
Let's pretend you were writing an "rcurses" library. Need a line of 20 "-". No problem. Anyway, from now on we'll all contact you before adding a feature to a language.
here.
Well, if you are constantly hassled by more codebase to use (more to learn, more bloat to be added), better development tools (that take more time to learn than the time you might save), more documentation (for new products that does exactly the same as the old products, except everything is different), how are you supposed to get the time to work? When are you going to sit down and simply hack?
Yes you're right. Keep it simple and complete. Thats why I code in brainfuck. That way I can get started faster than the Java developer using JBuilder. I'm bound to be more productive right?
Besides, I doubt more shit means better jobs. A good job is somewhere where you can simply do your thing, and get paid for it, not somewhere where you will have to incorporate every buzzword in a project description to be able to get something done (even if you get paid more). Let's face it, new doesn't mean better. For what it does, Fortran is a great language. It lets you get things done.
Agreed. I'm just saying more perl users --> more perl jobs --> more perl users.
And if you really believe open source will magically give you faster development, then you really need a reality check. While it might be true of some specific projects, it is certainly not a universal truth. Put 3-5 fulltime developers on a project, or 100 student hobbyists and watch who can keep up with deadlines. Open source certainly has some benefits (especially for the customer), but it is certainly not a silber bullet.
I'm not saying open source gives faster development, period. I'm saying open source Java development moves faster than open source Ruby development mainly because there are are more Java coders. If a language is growing it makes sense to jump on "the bandwagon" to reap the rewards. And if that isn't clear enough, I'll state it more clearly.
Ruby is a well designed, very easy to learn, language. It's userbase is growing. "Jumping on the bandwagon" will have many advantages.
the bandwagon?
Being on the bandwagon is what gives you more codebase to use, better development tools, more documentation/faqs/books, better jobs, faster development with open source, etc...
I'm on the bandwagon.
And now "average joe" (or my parents) who's "computer buddy" (me) installed Napster will see this and also stop using Napster. Think their user base will shrink by 50% again?
An applet? Not Flash? Am I on the right web?
I can just as easily create a piece of software and say "for use on closed source, proprietary OSs only".
Not that I would, but say a corporation didn't wan't you using wine to run their apps...
This is a good idea. I wish I'd thought of it. But what if a malicious user is running a "custom" version that sends trojans to requesting peers?
*joke*
I know, it wasn't that funny.
no 3d pics?
A guy I do contract work for managed to get his hands on one.
He played with it for a week.
Now he's back to using his Palm (no pun intended).
I hope you're right.
...but if you think companies sit on their hands on large and lucractive markets where such an opportunity is clearly exploitable you're only kidding yourself.
So it's more lucrative to charge a person once rather than weekly for the rest of their lives? I can't see how that's possible. In answer to the italicised comment, I don't think companies sit on their hands when an opportuinity is exploitable. This brings us right back to where I started.
Pharmaceutical companies. companies companies companies companies. Do you what that word means? That word is reserved for people in the business of making MONEY. They have stock. They have stock-holders. If they forget that they are around to make money, they dissapear.
How about coder? That word is reserved for one who writes code. In no way does it evince to the motives behind the coding.
Give me a better example please.
Oh I forgot. It's the researchers who write themselves the paycheks, and who pay off the AMA and decide where Pfietzer or whoever is going to spend their money. That's like saying a developer at Microsoft want's to take his time and write clean reliable code.
A lot of diseases are viral, genetic, or other-wise uncurable...
Oh, I guess it's you who's the medical expert. See my post here.
Eventually, the proponents of bioinformatics claim, the new field will change health care by allowing pharmaceutical companies to shave years off the drug-discovery process, and letting doctors tailor medicines to an individual's genetic makeup.
Pharmaceutical companies are around to make money. That's why they create drugs that treat symptoms and not drugs that are cures. Now they're investing in ways to make more money from us. Great.
Finally we're seeing some Ruby advocates here! I've been trying to evangalize as much as possible. Ruby is a great language. Sure, it hasn't had quite enough time to mature as Perl has, but it's built on a better foundation. Perl (as we know) is a hack of technologies that are usefull but dated (awk, c, sh, grep, etc...), while Ruby has started with a cleaner state. And now while Perl is being "hacked" more, Ruby is busy catching up... wait a year or two.
...I'd rather have our CGI's readable...
You'll probably find that they end up being half the size as well (depending on how large they were to start). I'm sure this will be modded as (troll/flamebait/offtopic) but it was worth it to express the joy it brings me to have read your posts.
I agree with you that intent is the important part. Even Kant said that the only truely good thing is a good intention (and hence the converse is true as well). I just didn't know that the law saw it that way when it came to patents.
The judge also states that even if Infineon has infringed on the remaining patents, they didn't do so willfully.
Don't get me wrong, I hate all this patent shit too, but if someone infringes on a patent, since when does it matter if it was "willfully" or not?
Will crackers start to go after these machines too?
An OS that a substantial percent of the population will be using and that ISPs will want to support! Of course these machines will be a target.
Hopefully we'll see this without copy-protection.
Read this. Especially the part about a D20 concentration of only 50% in a human would stop cell mitosis (the mechanism that is cellular reproduction).