You do know that Java is compiled to native, don't you?
The only reason Java is slower than C, is because C can have unchecked arrays, or low level access to CPU registers or vector SIMD.
Given the same code written in both C and Java, and including C range bounds checking (to make it as safe as Java), the speed will be the same. Or, quite possibly Java would be quicker once the JVM starts stripping away the checks once it realises there is no possibilities of bounds been breached.
"Seeing that it was impossible to check Google's claims in depth, the ICO decided to just take Google's word it had done what it claimed."
Well, yeh. It only take a memory stick full of WIFI data to be stuck in the back of a draw, or in someone's pocket. What's the ICO gonna do? Strip search all employees?
"Depending on his age, you might just try putting up rules"....
He is 8. We have a porn filter. I keep an eye on what in general he's looking at.....usually its just minecraft plugins, and youtube. But, really, he's free to explore the web himself, without us having to be there to be net-nanny all the time. He's learning about the internet....what to click on, and what not to click on (which results in a BLOCKED message)..exe file viruses that he happens to download, are not runnable (its a mac), but I make a point of telling him what they are, and to be wary.
I see him becoming more net-aware as time goes on. At some point, im sure he's going to want to find out what is behind the great internet filter, and will probably develop the technical skills to do so. I am there for if he wants to discuss anything he stumbles upon.
I believe that parenting is about letting your kids find out on their own... and, to be there if they fall, or need advice. Porn filters have a place in this, because, Really, I don't want him seeing that kind of stuff before at least he hits puberty. Overly protective parenting is far worse.
Yes, you're absolutely right. Going to take back that laptop from my son, give him a load of books to read, and make sure he only uses the computer in our presence.
Keep him away from the wider Internet, its BAAAHHHHHDD. Monitor EVERYTHING he does, make sure he only frequents websites I have personally vetted, and woe betide should he even look at doing a google search for himself.....
I'm sure he'll grow up being a rounded individual and will thank me in years to come. Crewel to be kind.
So you imply you need a test suite, in order to maintain legacy code?
You know that most code out there has no tests for it..... and debate is still on to if automated testing really does make a difference to software quality.
Apple's first Macbook Air had the same lightweight technology. After feedback received they released iWeight (patent pending), a device to clip on the side to keep it from floating away. The later macbooks had iweight integrated into the main unibody. Many people are unhappy as it means they cant make use of the iWeight if the laptop breaks, or becomes obsolete. But, ya know, thats Apple at its old tricks.
From TOS, it says the user has already clicked on the link, and their PC has become infected. My guess that it has installed a rogue root cert into the browser, and rogue DNS entries, so that the link to the attackers server is indeed encrypted, and the browser shows it as safe.
No.....you cant do this, without having a communication link between the two photons.
The correlation of the photon polarisation is defined as the cosine of the angle between the spot meters (Haha - Easy Maths c=Math.cos(spot1.getAngle() - spot2.getAngle()) . So, in code, both photon objects *must* have a reference to each other, in order to find the angle to feed into the equation. In reality, this means the photons must communicate using "spooky actions at a distance"
Its is not possible to represent the state of a quantum object, using local variables alone. This is what Bell proved.
The alternative, is there is no quantum object, there is no photon. But instead an infinite array of objects, all having slightly different local state.
If reality is like this..... then, a photon isn't like a shiny ball traveling through space....but instead, an infinite array of photons all having a slightly different properties, and all having zero energy, but as a whole having some energy.
only when this thing interacts with something, at that point, the correct photon is selected out of the array, and 'becomes' a particle.
I wonder if.....maybe its not a single infinate array, but rather a stream of photons..... yet, practically all those photons do not interact with anything. only the ones that happen to be preconfigued to be able to be filtered through the spot meter work. The rest of them just never show up.
....that is, getEntanlgedPair() returns an array of photon pairs, not just 1. Each of those photons has been preconfigured to be set at a particular polarisation.... then, the spot meter is made to only look at the photon pair its orientated to look at. this way, everything can be precalculated up front, and stored within the photons.
the problem is, there is only a limited amount of angles you can precalculate for. you could do 360 degrees of a circle..... BUT, the spot meter could be configured to at a half of a degree..... Its impossible to precalculate all outcomes (unless you happen to have a quantum computer!!),
Ok, You would perhaps create a class that is your entangled pair source. It will have a method, getEntangledPair(), which would pass back 2 photon objects. There would be a SPOT meter class, that could compare the polarity of 2 photon objects, and give a '0' or '1'. its up to you how you code them.
Now, the trick is, to try and make your program work, and produce the results of the experiment, *without* having any communication between the photons objects (via, say some global / shared variable). The problem Is, I cant do that. I tried. I failed. The *only* way I can get my program to produce the same results, is by having such a hidden communication mechanism. According to Bells proof (mathematical), its impossible to do this.....though, I dont understand the maths, I have an appreciation why I cant make it work.
there is another way of making it work, however, without using hidden communication....
Oh, once you've read it, if you can code, go try making a program to simulate whats going on.... Try it. At some point you'll come to the conclusion that something really weird is happening.
Facebook's changes are pissing off its users....the same people who put them in the dominant position it is in now.
The thing about facebook though, it isn't like Ebay, where a critical mass of people have no choice to stay. They are free to go elsewhere.....and will as soon as another competitor shows up that offeres a better experience. In my opinion, the time for this to happen is imminent.
I dont think they care, about VPN or proxies. If you have these, then you're obviously old and wise enough to be able to look at whatever you want, whenever you want.
This is about minors, kids, who end up getting porn on there phones/tablets by accident, while looking for something innocent.
This is *Not* an April fools!!... Slashdot is reporting on an RFC, published in draft status. No Joke. Like other RFC's published on April 1st, It probably wont have any real world usage (unless we actually find a way of sending things faster than light, at which point the universe collapses into a paradoxial soup), and is there mostly for its comedic value. BUT, that is not the point, the point is this is an attempt at working out how to send things over a FTL medium, and documenting them in an RFC.
IP Over Avian carriers (rfc1149), another April 1st RFC, was implemented a few years later. It worked.
A CD is a piece of plastic, covered with silver. A laser is used to focus light of areas of the CD, which will result in different luminosity of reflected light, causing different voltage potentials over a photodiode. This analogue signal will be enhanced, noise removed, before sending though a Analogue to Digital converter.
If a CD was digital, like a USB drive, there wouldn't need to be this process!
A CD is no more digital than a Wifi radio signal, or the printed text in a newspaper. If you claim a CD is digital, then I'll claim an audio tape is also digital, because old computers loaded games from them.
A CD is a piece of plastic, covered with silver. A laser is used to focus light of areas of the CD, which will result in different luminosity of reflected light, causing different voltage potentials over a photodiode. This analogue signal will be enhanced, noise removed, before sending though a Analogue to Digital converter.
If A CD was digital, like an MP3 file, there wouldn't need to be this process!
A CD is no more digital than a Wifi radio signal, or the printed text in a newspaper.
Slashdot Mirror
No - Cant find anything about OTLP
Only Online Transaction Processing (OLTP)..... Whichi is not OTLP
whats OTLP?
You do know that Java is compiled to native, don't you?
The only reason Java is slower than C, is because C can have unchecked arrays, or low level access to CPU registers or vector SIMD.
Given the same code written in both C and Java, and including C range bounds checking (to make it as safe as Java), the speed will be the same. Or, quite possibly Java would be quicker once the JVM starts stripping away the checks once it realises there is no possibilities of bounds been breached.
"Seeing that it was impossible to check Google's claims in depth, the ICO decided to just take Google's word it had done what it claimed."
Well, yeh. It only take a memory stick full of WIFI data to be stuck in the back of a draw, or in someone's pocket. What's the ICO gonna do? Strip search all employees?
Googles word for it, is the best they can do.
"Depending on his age, you might just try putting up rules"....
He is 8. We have a porn filter. I keep an eye on what in general he's looking at.....usually its just minecraft plugins, and youtube. But, really, he's free to explore the web himself, without us having to be there to be net-nanny all the time. He's learning about the internet....what to click on, and what not to click on (which results in a BLOCKED message). .exe file viruses that he happens to download, are not runnable (its a mac), but I make a point of telling him what they are, and to be wary.
I see him becoming more net-aware as time goes on. At some point, im sure he's going to want to find out what is behind the great internet filter, and will probably develop the technical skills to do so. I am there for if he wants to discuss anything he stumbles upon.
I believe that parenting is about letting your kids find out on their own... and, to be there if they fall, or need advice. Porn filters have a place in this, because, Really, I don't want him seeing that kind of stuff before at least he hits puberty. Overly protective parenting is far worse.
Yes, you're absolutely right. Going to take back that laptop from my son, give him a load of books to read, and make sure he only uses the computer in our presence.
Keep him away from the wider Internet, its BAAAHHHHHDD. Monitor EVERYTHING he does, make sure he only frequents websites I have personally vetted, and woe betide should he even look at doing a google search for himself.....
I'm sure he'll grow up being a rounded individual and will thank me in years to come. Crewel to be kind.
So you imply you need a test suite, in order to maintain legacy code?
You know that most code out there has no tests for it..... and debate is still on to if automated testing really does make a difference to software quality.
Same old PC market - 2 years behind Apple.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5Qm0XRgQB0
Apple's first Macbook Air had the same lightweight technology. After feedback received they released iWeight (patent pending), a device to clip on the side to keep it from floating away. The later macbooks had iweight integrated into the main unibody. Many people are unhappy as it means they cant make use of the iWeight if the laptop breaks, or becomes obsolete. But, ya know, thats Apple at its old tricks.
From TOS, it says the user has already clicked on the link, and their PC has become infected. My guess that it has installed a rogue root cert into the browser, and rogue DNS entries, so that the link to the attackers server is indeed encrypted, and the browser shows it as safe.
No.....you cant do this, without having a communication link between the two photons.
The correlation of the photon polarisation is defined as the cosine of the angle between the spot meters (Haha - Easy Maths c=Math.cos(spot1.getAngle() - spot2.getAngle()) . So, in code, both photon objects *must* have a reference to each other, in order to find the angle to feed into the equation. In reality, this means the photons must communicate using "spooky actions at a distance"
Its is not possible to represent the state of a quantum object, using local variables alone. This is what Bell proved.
The alternative, is there is no quantum object, there is no photon. But instead an infinite array of objects, all having slightly different local state.
If reality is like this..... then, a photon isn't like a shiny ball traveling through space....but instead, an infinite array of photons all having a slightly different properties, and all having zero energy, but as a whole having some energy.
only when this thing interacts with something, at that point, the correct photon is selected out of the array, and 'becomes' a particle.
I wonder if.....maybe its not a single infinate array, but rather a stream of photons..... yet, practically all those photons do not interact with anything. only the ones that happen to be preconfigued to be able to be filtered through the spot meter work. The rest of them just never show up.
....that is, getEntanlgedPair() returns an array of photon pairs, not just 1. Each of those photons has been preconfigured to be set at a particular polarisation.... then, the spot meter is made to only look at the photon pair its orientated to look at. this way, everything can be precalculated up front, and stored within the photons.
the problem is, there is only a limited amount of angles you can precalculate for. you could do 360 degrees of a circle..... BUT, the spot meter could be configured to at a half of a degree..... Its impossible to precalculate all outcomes (unless you happen to have a quantum computer!!),
Replying to an anonymous coward.... :-/
Ok, You would perhaps create a class that is your entangled pair source. It will have a method, getEntangledPair(), which would pass back 2 photon objects.
There would be a SPOT meter class, that could compare the polarity of 2 photon objects, and give a '0' or '1'. its up to you how you code them.
Now, the trick is, to try and make your program work, and produce the results of the experiment, *without* having any communication between the photons objects (via, say some global / shared variable).
The problem Is, I cant do that. I tried. I failed. The *only* way I can get my program to produce the same results, is by having such a hidden communication mechanism. According to Bells proof (mathematical), its impossible to do this.....though, I dont understand the maths, I have an appreciation why I cant make it work.
there is another way of making it work, however, without using hidden communication....
Oh, once you've read it, if you can code, go try making a program to simulate whats going on.... Try it. At some point you'll come to the conclusion that something really weird is happening.
I believed as you did. Then I read this http://quantumtantra.com/bell2.html - Its like Quantum physics , without the maths, and for the it literate.
Changed my ideas on what QM was all about.
Go read it. Seriously.
Facebook's changes are pissing off its users....the same people who put them in the dominant position it is in now.
The thing about facebook though, it isn't like Ebay, where a critical mass of people have no choice to stay. They are free to go elsewhere.....and will as soon as another competitor shows up that offeres a better experience. In my opinion, the time for this to happen is imminent.
I meant £16.66 ! lol
They already tax revenue. its called VAT, and for every £100 of takings, 16.6p is sent to the govenment.
I dont think they care, about VPN or proxies. If you have these, then you're obviously old and wise enough to be able to look at whatever you want, whenever you want.
This is about minors, kids, who end up getting porn on there phones/tablets by accident, while looking for something innocent.
The dreamcast had a network socket..... that didn't help it.
This is *Not* an April fools!!... Slashdot is reporting on an RFC, published in draft status. No Joke. Like other RFC's published on April 1st, It probably wont have any real world usage (unless we actually find a way of sending things faster than light, at which point the universe collapses into a paradoxial soup), and is there mostly for its comedic value. BUT, that is not the point, the point is this is an attempt at working out how to send things over a FTL medium, and documenting them in an RFC.
IP Over Avian carriers (rfc1149), another April 1st RFC, was implemented a few years later. It worked.
CD's arn't digital.
A CD is a piece of plastic, covered with silver. A laser is used to focus light of areas of the CD, which will result in different luminosity of reflected light, causing different voltage potentials over a photodiode. This analogue signal will be enhanced, noise removed, before sending though a Analogue to Digital converter.
If a CD was digital, like a USB drive, there wouldn't need to be this process!
A CD is no more digital than a Wifi radio signal, or the printed text in a newspaper. If you claim a CD is digital, then I'll claim an audio tape is also digital, because old computers loaded games from them.
A CD is a piece of plastic, covered with silver. A laser is used to focus light of areas of the CD, which will result in different luminosity of reflected light, causing different voltage potentials over a photodiode. This analogue signal will be enhanced, noise removed, before sending though a Analogue to Digital converter.
If A CD was digital, like an MP3 file, there wouldn't need to be this process!
A CD is no more digital than a Wifi radio signal, or the printed text in a newspaper.
'The same software, which infected Macs by exploiting a flaw in a version of Oracle Corp's Java software used as a plug-in on Web browsers"
I thought Apple disabled Java in the browser months ago?
My band went from 72 views to 5. Damn you Google!
Ok, ummm, post the youtube link -