On the contrary the internet makes knowing 'facts' irrelevant, no one has to memorise information anymore.
Right, and plus the "facts" are changing at such a rapid pace, that knowing them in your memory is pointless when you can get the current "facts" with a few keystrokes.
I heard of some nit out there that didn't think that Einstein was that smart because he didn't know how many feet were in a mile. Einstein's response, "I can look that up".
So, by the nit's logic, we are all as smart as Einstein now:)
Journals are peer reviewed, and getting a paper accepted to different journals is not the same. Meaning, that some have super mod points over others.
Also, keep in mind that the creation of the web was to more easily transfer scientific data to scientists, but I don't think its intent was to replace journal publications.
Another point, is that in academia, they have a saying "Publish or perish". I simply don't think that "throwing some crap on the web" is a drop in replacement. Like the parent said, any bozo can put something on the web, but its not the same as putting something in a scientific journal. Now, many of these journals are available over the web, and they often cost money, and that money is spent on the review process and overhead costs. These journals do not have advertising, they are about science. The web is about, I dunno, piracy, porn, and slashdot or something.
I have both RH9 and FC3 in production right now. At my last job, I believe there is still a Mandrake box with a 2.2 kernel on it running strong. The uptime flips after 500 or so days, but it works OK besides that.
..the big killer is that you can't even use 2000 columns, because if you did, you would run out of space in the row, unless the average field size was under 4 bytes.
I'm so glad I've never actually needed to put, like, data in a database. Sounds tricky.
IIRC the term singularity can refer to anyplace that predictive systems appear break down.
I'm not an expert in this area, but I think that its the other way around. AFAIK, when predictive systems appear to break down, that is in the realm of chaos theory (which does not seem to be as hot of a topic it once was.)
The way I see singularity its like the analogy game of:
singularity : technology event horizon : black hole
I know, I know, it's almost too little, too late, but it's better than nothing and as long as this trend continues, at least we might have a decent amount of cross-browser standards in a few years time, as opposed to none if Microsoft simply hadn't bothered.
Kinda like the guy coming to his senses and complying now that a gun is at his head.
Face it, as much as MS has tried to "own" the web, open standards and competition (mostly from open source projects), has figuratively put the gun to their head.
I sure don't miss the day when webistes told me I needed to be running a certain version of windows with a certain version of IE with a certain window dimension.
Next step towards standards is more "media rich" content. W3C is working on this standard, and hopefully this will clear up the muddied waters with WMV, Flash, QuickTime, Java, SilverLIght, et al.
Others used scripts to refresh the page in a loop, and/or to simulate a click on the ad if they were paid more for a click. Others urged their users to do that for them.
I make $5,000/month sitting at home clicking on banner ads.
Don't you?
Best job I've ever had since I was paid to watch TV.
Others have been completely reinvented â" Boo.com, an online clothing retailer that burned through $125 million in funding in the late 1990s
I read a book, and I think there is a website (or was) that was related called "F*cked up companies" or something like that.
Anyway, it was page after page of the dot bomb "business" blunders. It was almost as if each page was a photocopy of the previous one. The author was pretty funny as well.
One account talked about how one company selling I dunno dirt or something on the internet went through $360 million dollars in like 18 months or so. Big parties, advertising, venture capital, you name it, they had it. All but for some reason, nobody wanted to buy dirt on the internet for some reason.
The best line regarding this company's adventure, was something like "If they just did _NOTHING_, and blew away $1.0 million a year, again, doing nothing, they could have stayed in "business" for about 100 years".
I have some java hate, but java today is not the java of 1997. Its core class libraries are complete and I would assume consistant.
My first experiences with java were the stuff that ran like crap as the so called end-all-be all write once run anywhere GUI language. That is not true today. Java is now a middleware language. Its become glue, and more behind the scenes than it was back in the day.
So, what makes a programming language successful? Well, of course, its success!
No, seriously, today, a programming language becomes and _stays_ succesful if it meets these criteria. 1) Does it have a good user community and is is still used for new projects and not just "legacy" ones? 2) Does it have extensibility and interoperability? That is a BIG one. CPAN, libraries, JARs, APIs, all of those additional features determine a successful programming language.
Today, the most successful programming languages are FORTRAN (its a science and engineering thing, and its not going away tomorrow), C/C++, JavaScript, Java, python,.NET, perl, (does SQL fit in here?), and I guess some ruby, I have little exposure to ruby, and its the newest kid on the block I listed, so the jury is still out on that one.
Programming languages come and go. The way I see it, the real question, is how are we going to get any/all of the above languages take advantage of the trend towards distributed and SMP systems?
_NONE_ of the languages listed there do this particularly well, and there have been TONS of new languages to fix these problems, but to date, we are left with threads, OpenMP, and MPI, and some lesser known languages like Erlang, Titanium, High Performance FORTRAN (or did they give up on that one?), and the like.
I see programming going through a needed paridigm shift "Real Soon" (TM) to address these issues. Along with the development tools as well. Computers are bigger and more complex than they were yesterday, and the languages have not yet caught up to this complexity.
Maybe Ada will come back to life and fix all of this? I don't think so.
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.
Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
That is easy.
All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
I've also noticed that many competing products coincindentally have similar version numbers. Solaris is at 10 now. So is OpenSUSE. So is OS X. I've seen this with other products as well.
Then you have subversions and patch levels of the major versions. Then you have software where the name is as intuitive as a drug companies' latest and greatest drug.
I've gotten numb to all of this, its just language, and its going to change.
MS was starting to change back into the company of its golden era (i.e. late 80s - 90s) when it released operating systems with new features that made one excited to buy the latest and greatest OS.
Huh? I thought I was around back then, and I didn't remember this excitement. I remember things like they added commas in the DIR command for file sizes. They added disk cacheing sometime back then. They stole disk compression software that I didn't think worked that well back then. (I'm assuming the 90s part was early 90s...) Windows 0-3x wasn't much to get excited about.
I actually liked Win95 when it first came out. But that gradually faded by 1997 in favor of UNIX/Linux (mostly Linux).
Regardless of if you like Apple or OS X, or whatever, watch Steve Jobs talk about new products and features coming from the company, and you will see people get excited. Some features, people are silent about, others people are in awe.
Then you have developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers and throwing of chairs and a company that talks more about features that are pulled than are introduced.
Sure, its as easy to bust on Microsoft as it is GWB, but I think both have earned their respective forms of ____isms.
The laws regarding marijuana are much more lax in Canada as well, but they have been convinced by their southern neighbor that they should tightnen things up a bit, and voila, seedbanks and other previously legal things just dissapear.
At least, thats what a friend of a friend told me.
At least we will have all of our needs taken care of by the government.
I mean, what do we need? Food, shelter, and companionship.
All are offered free of charge at your local prison.
Sarcasm (maybe not) aside, I mean, how the *uck can someone tell if my iPod has illegal or legal downloads on it? I can tell you for a fact, that I don't even know which are legal or illegal, they all look the same to me. Well, now some of the low bitrate ones, I might question, but how would anybody else?
My thoughts exactly. Its like "Hmm, we need a good buzzword here, ah Web 2.0, that will work".
I haven't read the FA yet, but here are the big 2 with data centers infrastructure-wise. 1) Power 2) cooling. Always has been, always will be. Frankly, I think that pumping a bunch of cold air in the floor is a bit primitive. I think in the near future we will see power and cooling be more a part of the racks than the way its done now. There are some data centers that are doing this, but its one of the things that its too new for it to be universal.
I've thought for a long time that the hot row, cold row thing is also a bit primitive. I think that it would be cool if there were plenums _between_ the racks that removed the heat from the systems _upward_, not front to back like its done now.
I also don't understand why DC/telco type systems are not more common, and put redundant power supplies in the racks and not have each 1U pizza box have a power supply. So much energy is lost this way, its not even funny.
Anyway, while web 3.0 is on its way, I'll read the FA and see what is going on. I didn't know HP was in the petabyte storage arena, and I'll also see what IBM is up to...
I thought about heat, cooling, power, all the standard data center stuff, then I thought. Well, Isn't Vegas a great place for solar? Not a mention of it in the article. It mentions needing 3 million gallons of water a day (not a commodity in the desert), they also say that the building was left over from the Enron fiasco.
I don't know, to me something does not seem to add up here. They are advertising 3x the power density of the typical data center (1500 Watts/sq ft vs 500), and all that. Fortune 100 companies as companies, all that, but also the stuff where they get database feeds from databases that nobody knows about, and that they have a display that will immediately update whenever someone mentions the word bomb on an airplane (are airplanes wired that well now?).
To me, the article leaves many more questions than answers. Something seems fishy with this, but maybe my tin foil hat is on too tightly today.
With virtualization as good and ubiquitous as it is today, what is the point of booting up into windows? I mean, run your legacy apps that you need in the VM, but don't do stuff like read email or surf the web from it. It simply isn't a good idea. Its simply not worth the time (== money) to do such tasks that can be done more securely from a phone or another computer system.
A fine anechdote here, a friend wanted a laptop. I suggested get a Mac, he came back with the common answer "But windows is all I know", and he's not a computer guy, and he doesn't know windows that well either. Anyway, it was his money and whatnot, and we found a pretty good Pentium M based system that was in his price range, and looked OK (I'm not a PC guy, but it seemed OK). It was a Compaq/HP thing.
It has this half broken HP stuff that boots on startup that he has to turn off ever time. He came over my house one day, and his machine was LOADED with adware/spyware or whatever this junk is. It took us 2 nights to get his system back to operational. I did some web searches, and ran adaware, plenty of reboots, the scans took forever, blah, blah. Most of the time, we just sat there and watched the progress bar, err, progress.
We actually wanted to do something, he was going to get me to listen to some of his bands music, but here we were playing around with this crap. While watching the progrss bar, he said to me, "You know, your Mac is so nice. It just works, and I wish I had taken your advice, and my next computer is going to be a Mac".
Sure, the tide may change, and all of these bozos might start targeting Macs tonight, who knows. But I compare this to living in a neighborhood that has changed. Theres a bunch of crime, and it just wasn't as nice as it was when you first moved in. When this happens, you either get together some kind of neighborhood alliance to fix the problem (very unlikely), or you just do what nomadic humans do, and just move to another place that doesn't have the problems, and poof, the problems go away.
Where I work, we have a mix of Windows, *NIX, and Macs. I think that the only mandated and centrally controlled antivirus stuff goes on the Windows boxes, and AFAIK this is a waste of time and money like the article says. I don't think the stuff does anything, or at least enough to justify the time and effort.
Windows is a gaming environment and for legacy software, I would not recommend it for anything else.
Mittens / Fido will always live on inside you *Yes yes sappy but it's true and you KNOW IT*
The thing is that one of the things that makes life so special is that it is temporary. Why are slasher movies so popular with teenagers on dates? Basically, because it makes the girl (and boy) scared, which in turn makes them feel closer to each other.
I find our _selective_ emotional attachement to life to be almost amusing. If its cute or looks like us or it has some other kind of emotional attachment (eg, bald eagle), then lets save it!
If its not cute or if it doesn't have any value to us, then lets kill it.
But hey, if someone wants to clone Fido or their favorite spitting cockroach, its fine by me.
What about all of the creative programmers that create the interaction that drives the sales of these video games? What about their millions of dollars?
Yeah, everybody is entitled to life + 100 years of profit from every piece of work that they do. Thats what I get, don't you?
The thing is that the guy can't say this after the fact. If he wants a cut, then that needs to be in writing before he accepts the job. I mean, $100k is not bad for what I would imagine is a part time job for a while. I don't know the game, so I don't know the scale of his dialog skills in it, but I doubt it was 2,000 hours of work over a year of time (1 FTE in manager speak).
Then my brain woke up and I realized they were thinking of the Windows command Ctrl+C which copies the marked text..
Right. Me too. I don't use windows, so I think Ctrl+C == SIGINT.
I saw a similar thing on another article here where they had Ctrl+Z in the article, and that took me a minute to figure out as well. I thought, WTF does suspending a task have to do with anything??? I then had to figure out that Ctrl+Z is the undo command in windows.
Slashdot Mirror
On the contrary the internet makes knowing 'facts' irrelevant, no one has to memorise information anymore.
:)
Right, and plus the "facts" are changing at such a rapid pace, that knowing them in your memory is pointless when you can get the current "facts" with a few keystrokes.
I heard of some nit out there that didn't think that Einstein was that smart because he didn't know how many feet were in a mile. Einstein's response, "I can look that up".
So, by the nit's logic, we are all as smart as Einstein now
I second the parent's opinion.
Journals are peer reviewed, and getting a paper accepted to different journals is not the same. Meaning, that some have super mod points over others.
Also, keep in mind that the creation of the web was to more easily transfer scientific data to scientists, but I don't think its intent was to replace journal publications.
Another point, is that in academia, they have a saying "Publish or perish". I simply don't think that "throwing some crap on the web" is a drop in replacement. Like the parent said, any bozo can put something on the web, but its not the same as putting something in a scientific journal. Now, many of these journals are available over the web, and they often cost money, and that money is spent on the review process and overhead costs. These journals do not have advertising, they are about science. The web is about, I dunno, piracy, porn, and slashdot or something.
They're no more trapped than companies stuck with precompiled, third-party software/drivers for, say, RedHat 9 or Fedora Core 3.
Tis life, my friend.
The difference is that I can call up Google and ask for RH9:
http://www.icewalkers.com/Linux/Software/53470/Red-Hat-Linux.html
or FC3:
http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/core/3/i386/iso/
I have both RH9 and FC3 in production right now. At my last job, I believe there is still a Mandrake box with a 2.2 kernel on it running strong. The uptime flips after 500 or so days, but it works OK besides that.
..the big killer is that you can't even use 2000 columns, because if you did, you would run out of space in the row, unless the average field size was under 4 bytes.
I'm so glad I've never actually needed to put, like, data in a database. Sounds tricky.
IIRC the term singularity can refer to anyplace that predictive systems appear break down.
I'm not an expert in this area, but I think that its the other way around. AFAIK, when predictive systems appear to break down, that is in the realm of chaos theory (which does not seem to be as hot of a topic it once was.)
The way I see singularity its like the analogy game of:
singularity : technology
event horizon : black hole
Once crossed, you can't go back.
I know, I know, it's almost too little, too late, but it's better than nothing and as long as this trend continues, at least we might have a decent amount of cross-browser standards in a few years time, as opposed to none if Microsoft simply hadn't bothered.
Kinda like the guy coming to his senses and complying now that a gun is at his head.
Face it, as much as MS has tried to "own" the web, open standards and competition (mostly from open source projects), has figuratively put the gun to their head.
I sure don't miss the day when webistes told me I needed to be running a certain version of windows with a certain version of IE with a certain window dimension.
Next step towards standards is more "media rich" content. W3C is working on this standard, and hopefully this will clear up the muddied waters with WMV, Flash, QuickTime, Java, SilverLIght, et al.
...and somewhat akin to a docudrama with a purpose, trying to answer the question "Why?".
"Why not?"
I'm gonna have my kicks before the whole sh*t-house goes up in flames!" -- The Lizard King, aka Mr. Mojo Risin
Others used scripts to refresh the page in a loop, and/or to simulate a click on the ad if they were paid more for a click. Others urged their users to do that for them.
I make $5,000/month sitting at home clicking on banner ads.
Don't you?
Best job I've ever had since I was paid to watch TV.
From the summary:
Others have been completely reinvented â" Boo.com, an online clothing retailer that burned through $125 million in funding in the late 1990s
I read a book, and I think there is a website (or was) that was related called "F*cked up companies" or something like that.
Anyway, it was page after page of the dot bomb "business" blunders. It was almost as if each page was a photocopy of the previous one. The author was pretty funny as well.
One account talked about how one company selling I dunno dirt or something on the internet went through $360 million dollars in like 18 months or so. Big parties, advertising, venture capital, you name it, they had it. All but for some reason, nobody wanted to buy dirt on the internet for some reason.
The best line regarding this company's adventure, was something like "If they just did _NOTHING_, and blew away $1.0 million a year, again, doing nothing, they could have stayed in "business" for about 100 years".
Makes one think, now doesn't it?
I have some java hate, but java today is not the java of 1997. Its core class libraries are complete and I would assume consistant.
.NET, perl, (does SQL fit in here?), and I guess some ruby, I have little exposure to ruby, and its the newest kid on the block I listed, so the jury is still out on that one.
My first experiences with java were the stuff that ran like crap as the so called end-all-be all write once run anywhere GUI language. That is not true today. Java is now a middleware language. Its become glue, and more behind the scenes than it was back in the day.
So, what makes a programming language successful? Well, of course, its success!
No, seriously, today, a programming language becomes and _stays_ succesful if it meets these criteria. 1) Does it have a good user community and is is still used for new projects and not just "legacy" ones? 2) Does it have extensibility and interoperability? That is a BIG one. CPAN, libraries, JARs, APIs, all of those additional features determine a successful programming language.
Today, the most successful programming languages are FORTRAN (its a science and engineering thing, and its not going away tomorrow), C/C++, JavaScript, Java, python,
Programming languages come and go. The way I see it, the real question, is how are we going to get any/all of the above languages take advantage of the trend towards distributed and SMP systems?
_NONE_ of the languages listed there do this particularly well, and there have been TONS of new languages to fix these problems, but to date, we are left with threads, OpenMP, and MPI, and some lesser known languages like Erlang, Titanium, High Performance FORTRAN (or did they give up on that one?), and the like.
I see programming going through a needed paridigm shift "Real Soon" (TM) to address these issues. Along with the development tools as well. Computers are bigger and more complex than they were yesterday, and the languages have not yet caught up to this complexity.
Maybe Ada will come back to life and fix all of this? I don't think so.
"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country
who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people
along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a
communist dictatorship.
Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
That is easy.
All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and
denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and
exposing the country to greater danger."
Some dude said that a while back.
Solaris 2.5.1 -> Solaris 6
Java 1.4 -> Java 5
I've also noticed that many competing products coincindentally have similar version numbers. Solaris is at 10 now. So is OpenSUSE. So is OS X. I've seen this with other products as well.
Then you have subversions and patch levels of the major versions. Then you have software where the name is as intuitive as a drug companies' latest and greatest drug.
I've gotten numb to all of this, its just language, and its going to change.
Oh right, this time it is because of backwards compatibility, rather then any other reason.
Its backwor~1 not "backwards compatibility".
Sorry, had to correct that for you.
MS was starting to change back into the company of its golden era (i.e. late 80s - 90s) when it released operating systems with new features that made one excited to buy the latest and greatest OS.
Huh? I thought I was around back then, and I didn't remember this excitement. I remember things like they added commas in the DIR command for file sizes. They added disk cacheing sometime back then. They stole disk compression software that I didn't think worked that well back then. (I'm assuming the 90s part was early 90s...) Windows 0-3x wasn't much to get excited about.
I actually liked Win95 when it first came out. But that gradually faded by 1997 in favor of UNIX/Linux (mostly Linux).
Regardless of if you like Apple or OS X, or whatever, watch Steve Jobs talk about new products and features coming from the company, and you will see people get excited. Some features, people are silent about, others people are in awe.
Then you have developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, developers and throwing of chairs and a company that talks more about features that are pulled than are introduced.
Sure, its as easy to bust on Microsoft as it is GWB, but I think both have earned their respective forms of ____isms.
MacOS Classic -> MacOS X (basically the same as DOS-based Windows -> Windows NT, only a bit over half a decade later).
What's the second one ?
Changing platforms from PowerPC to x86, and having Rosetta making PowerPC apps still work, and their "Fat Binaries" are quite nice as well.
At least that is what came to my mind. Maybe the parent post had something else in theirs.
The laws regarding marijuana are much more lax in Canada as well, but they have been convinced by their southern neighbor that they should tightnen things up a bit, and voila, seedbanks and other previously legal things just dissapear.
At least, thats what a friend of a friend told me.
We are entering a recession...
Who cares?
At least we will have all of our needs taken care of by the government.
I mean, what do we need? Food, shelter, and companionship.
All are offered free of charge at your local prison.
Sarcasm (maybe not) aside, I mean, how the *uck can someone tell if my iPod has illegal or legal downloads on it? I can tell you for a fact, that I don't even know which are legal or illegal, they all look the same to me. Well, now some of the low bitrate ones, I might question, but how would anybody else?
My thoughts exactly. Its like "Hmm, we need a good buzzword here, ah Web 2.0, that will work".
I haven't read the FA yet, but here are the big 2 with data centers infrastructure-wise. 1) Power 2) cooling. Always has been, always will be. Frankly, I think that pumping a bunch of cold air in the floor is a bit primitive. I think in the near future we will see power and cooling be more a part of the racks than the way its done now. There are some data centers that are doing this, but its one of the things that its too new for it to be universal.
I've thought for a long time that the hot row, cold row thing is also a bit primitive. I think that it would be cool if there were plenums _between_ the racks that removed the heat from the systems _upward_, not front to back like its done now.
I also don't understand why DC/telco type systems are not more common, and put redundant power supplies in the racks and not have each 1U pizza box have a power supply. So much energy is lost this way, its not even funny.
Anyway, while web 3.0 is on its way, I'll read the FA and see what is going on. I didn't know HP was in the petabyte storage arena, and I'll also see what IBM is up to...
I thought about heat, cooling, power, all the standard data center stuff, then I thought. Well, Isn't Vegas a great place for solar? Not a mention of it in the article. It mentions needing 3 million gallons of water a day (not a commodity in the desert), they also say that the building was left over from the Enron fiasco.
I don't know, to me something does not seem to add up here. They are advertising 3x the power density of the typical data center (1500 Watts/sq ft vs 500), and all that. Fortune 100 companies as companies, all that, but also the stuff where they get database feeds from databases that nobody knows about, and that they have a display that will immediately update whenever someone mentions the word bomb on an airplane (are airplanes wired that well now?).
To me, the article leaves many more questions than answers. Something seems fishy with this, but maybe my tin foil hat is on too tightly today.
(c) since you have (a) and (b), the buckets get full and the water overflows the buckets.
Would anyone deal with a leaky roof like that?
When you consider the fact that the Microsoft OS du jour is forcefed to everyone through the OEM channel it is.
And many of the customers are putting XP back on them.
But hey, MS still wins. They get a sale even if nobody uses the crap. Sounds like good business either way.
I agree completely.
With virtualization as good and ubiquitous as it is today, what is the point of booting up into windows? I mean, run your legacy apps that you need in the VM, but don't do stuff like read email or surf the web from it. It simply isn't a good idea. Its simply not worth the time (== money) to do such tasks that can be done more securely from a phone or another computer system.
A fine anechdote here, a friend wanted a laptop. I suggested get a Mac, he came back with the common answer "But windows is all I know", and he's not a computer guy, and he doesn't know windows that well either. Anyway, it was his money and whatnot, and we found a pretty good Pentium M based system that was in his price range, and looked OK (I'm not a PC guy, but it seemed OK). It was a Compaq/HP thing.
It has this half broken HP stuff that boots on startup that he has to turn off ever time. He came over my house one day, and his machine was LOADED with adware/spyware or whatever this junk is. It took us 2 nights to get his system back to operational. I did some web searches, and ran adaware, plenty of reboots, the scans took forever, blah, blah. Most of the time, we just sat there and watched the progress bar, err, progress.
We actually wanted to do something, he was going to get me to listen to some of his bands music, but here we were playing around with this crap. While watching the progrss bar, he said to me, "You know, your Mac is so nice. It just works, and I wish I had taken your advice, and my next computer is going to be a Mac".
Sure, the tide may change, and all of these bozos might start targeting Macs tonight, who knows. But I compare this to living in a neighborhood that has changed. Theres a bunch of crime, and it just wasn't as nice as it was when you first moved in. When this happens, you either get together some kind of neighborhood alliance to fix the problem (very unlikely), or you just do what nomadic humans do, and just move to another place that doesn't have the problems, and poof, the problems go away.
Where I work, we have a mix of Windows, *NIX, and Macs. I think that the only mandated and centrally controlled antivirus stuff goes on the Windows boxes, and AFAIK this is a waste of time and money like the article says. I don't think the stuff does anything, or at least enough to justify the time and effort.
Windows is a gaming environment and for legacy software, I would not recommend it for anything else.
Mittens / Fido will always live on inside you *Yes yes sappy but it's true and you KNOW IT*
The thing is that one of the things that makes life so special is that it is temporary. Why are slasher movies so popular with teenagers on dates? Basically, because it makes the girl (and boy) scared, which in turn makes them feel closer to each other.
I find our _selective_ emotional attachement to life to be almost amusing. If its cute or looks like us or it has some other kind of emotional attachment (eg, bald eagle), then lets save it!
If its not cute or if it doesn't have any value to us, then lets kill it.
But hey, if someone wants to clone Fido or their favorite spitting cockroach, its fine by me.
What about all of the creative programmers that create the interaction that drives the sales of these video games? What about their millions of dollars?
Yeah, everybody is entitled to life + 100 years of profit from every piece of work that they do. Thats what I get, don't you?
The thing is that the guy can't say this after the fact. If he wants a cut, then that needs to be in writing before he accepts the job. I mean, $100k is not bad for what I would imagine is a part time job for a while. I don't know the game, so I don't know the scale of his dialog skills in it, but I doubt it was 2,000 hours of work over a year of time (1 FTE in manager speak).
Then my brain woke up and I realized they were thinking of the Windows command Ctrl+C which copies the marked text..
Right. Me too. I don't use windows, so I think Ctrl+C == SIGINT.
I saw a similar thing on another article here where they had Ctrl+Z in the article, and that took me a minute to figure out as well. I thought, WTF does suspending a task have to do with anything??? I then had to figure out that Ctrl+Z is the undo command in windows.