Wow. You mean like Rambus? Apparently you must don little Rambus pom-poms and a sultry little cheerleader skirt when you discuss them, huh? They near and dear to your heart?
That makes absolutely no sense. He defrauded American companies. He was arrested in America. Are you trying to say that I can sit in America and defraud European citizens to my heart's content as long as I don't break any American laws in doing so?
Can I ship guns to people in London with impunity? Hey - it's legal here (maybe). Can someone get on a German bulletin board and talk fondly about Nazi Germany and not worry about the censor-happy Germans arresting me if I should show up in Germany?
Obviously he was making a relative speed comparison using miles-per-hour as a metaphorical frame of reference. I'm sure he knows a mile is a mile, rocket surgeon.
Unjustly going to prison? Are your chromosomes scrambled, corky? He stole and defrauded money from people. Are you a complete retard?
As for the rest of your little rambling dialog, I half agree with the part about Bush. They obviously want war and it's going to happen regardless of what anyone says. I think Bush is a maniac on this issue and Congress needs to strip him of any warmaking powers he may think he has left over from the first Iraqi conflict.
a.) They followed US law. b.) They had no choice. In the US they could have gotten a warrant. In Russia they can't. They got their job done. c.) Where have you been? Europeans have been wanting to arrest US officials for executions and other violations of "enlightened" European laws for a long time. Get a freaking clue.
Sharon is approximately 1/3 of the problem in the region. He's a hardline psychopath and he's only creating hatred in a large group of people who will continue to murder and commit suicide bombings because of their hatred.
He's also a fucking idiot. He's in the middle of a group of people who will soon outnumber Israeli's 2:1 or more, and he's sticking to his policy of absolute domination and force. He apparently hasn't studied much history.
It's easy to be a hardliner and blame all the death on your enemies, it's harder to watch the bodies pile up because your leader refuses to compromise over anything.
He's commited a few atrocities of his own over there - his hands aren't exactly clean.
Really, are people putting these on their resume's? Truly dweeby.
Remings me of the sigs you'll see where people describe their awesome dream machine they build. Who gives a flying, spattering shit what your hobbies are?
-- My Baby Dual i386, with 64M(!!) overclocked 35Mhz memory and a SuperX VLB PCI card, hand build Linux OS (I call it TurdWare 1.0!).
Wow. So this must be some kind of amazing innovation, since almost every real operating system maker went with a real thread implementation using both user and kernel threads.
Ingo Molnar is I assume the smartest person in the Universe, and his reasoning instantly redecides the whole issue that many smart people at multiple large OS companies had though they'd mastered?
Linux - AIX II. "We know best, we'll redesign Unix from scratch!". In the meantime, as a developer I'll take HP-UX or Solaris anyday.
Maybe that's because NT offers so much more of a low level object security model, and so many more features at that level?
You can gripe about NT at the gestalt OS level all you want (I don't, but I almost understand the mentality of those who do), but you have to admit that it's got a decent low-level architecture. Everything is an object and it's all got a complex set of controls, e.g. ACL's.n It's probably just not geared to high speed context switches.
Wow, is Linux finally becoming a Real Unix OS? I won't see 50 "processes" when I do a 'ps' on a machine running Java applications, which causes less-than-aware users to claim it's using 500 Megs of memory and 10 processes?
Thank God, but why so long? HP-UX, Solaris, etc... have had a working, stable M:N implementation forever, and it worked. Linux's whole crap about "Eh, we're smarter than they are we'll use kernel threads but make them faster" was until now a load of crap - hubris, if you ask me.
Anyway, thank freaking God they finally have it working right.
Did anyone read his "Foundation" series (by Asimov) book written after Asimov died? It was absolutely horrible.
He had the Hubris to make these inane, _wrong_, comments about all the mistakes Asimov made, and explain how he chose to write in his own (horrible) style instead. It was truly a bad book - Bear and Benford's were good.
He's a pompous douchebag - and I'm more convinced of that than ever after reading his facile little Salon articles.
Wow, my bullshit sensor just went full-tilt. A certain tight loop, huh? Like this maybe: while (true) {}
Seriously - there's no such "tight loop". It's bad code, or it can be done another way. Poor compiler optimization is no reason to go around half-cocked claiming the P4 performs '80 times slower'. Recompile with a real compiler, or optimize it.
And you think Hammer is going to mystically solve your problem? Either rewrite, reoptimize, or get a PA-RISC, or Sparc based machine. What kind of crap is this?
Whoopdy doo. Nobody's arguing that Perl isn't a good choice for things like that. You're munging text over HTTP. Wow. Probably your script was less than a few hundred lines (not including modules). Congratulations, you used a task-appropriate tool.
Besides, bad programmers write bad Java code just like bad Perl programmers do. That task could easily have been done with 2-5 Java classes, log4j, and not much more code than your Perl version, if any.
First, badly written code is badly written code regardless of the language. There _can_ be good Perl code. Fine.
But Java is, umm, FREAKING TYPE SAFE. Duh. Type safety is one of the most important features of a language that's going to be used in large systems maintained by a number of people.
Most people who write "OO" wouldn't know good OO code if it bit them in the ass. And Perl is about as 'OO' as C.
Perl is perfect for some things - if you're handling lots of text, it's a short program, etc... But for enterprise applications? Client-server applications? Give me a freaking break, ya bunch of novices. Just because something _can_ be written in Perl doesn't mean it should be.
Wow - they were manufacturing products with 5 nanometer tolerances 40 years ago? Holy freaking wow, did you fly back in time and show them how to do it?
Amazing. And these laser turntables - they don't work? We should probably let the company know this and also the people who've bought them.
Wow, here we have some chimp systems admin who picked up Perl and started programming. Now he thinks anyone who uses are real software development language is an ivory tower do nothing, or an incompetent know-nothing CEO.
Truly, completely idiotic. Java a fad language, huh? For 8+ years? Wow, that's a long-lived fad. Are you completely daft?
What a true weiner. He sure made sure to tell everyone he's learning Japanese.
And he's also sure to make the (ostensibly tongue-in-cheak, but you're not fooling anyone) reference to his being a renaissance man. Umm, right. You're a regular DaVinci.
I read this - it wasn't a great book. In fact, it was only barely readable.
Trite premise. Oh boy, Gods are created by how much their subjects worship them. How, umm, original. I like it better the first time when Captain Kirk was involved. At least then it had better dialog.
The melding of fantasy and reality didn't work. Some books are fantastic and yet seem "realistic" within the rules they lay down. This book just seemed cheesy.
Neverwhere was better. I read that first and thought maybe he was good - then American Gods came along and Peeeeeuw! Somethin' stinks in here!
What Microsoft did wasn't cut and dried illegal, especially at the time. Your comparison to a murder case is laughable - truly.
Second, Java on the client _everywhere_ is an idiotic idea, anyway. It's best for server applications - Microsoft didn't kill anything. Why in God's name do you need cross-platform compatibility when 98% of the client world runs on the same platform?!
Lastly, Java is far from dead, rocket surgeon. To extend your inane comparison, it's like Michael Skakel being found guilty after the victim walks into the court and says "Hey, uhh, I'm not dead!".
Slashdot Mirror
Wow. You mean like Rambus? Apparently you must don little Rambus pom-poms and a sultry little cheerleader skirt when you discuss them, huh? They near and dear to your heart?
That makes absolutely no sense. He defrauded American companies. He was arrested in America. Are you trying to say that I can sit in America and defraud European citizens to my heart's content as long as I don't break any American laws in doing so?
Can I ship guns to people in London with impunity? Hey - it's legal here (maybe). Can someone get on a German bulletin board and talk fondly about Nazi Germany and not worry about the censor-happy Germans arresting me if I should show up in Germany?
You're off your rocker.
Obviously he was making a relative speed comparison using miles-per-hour as a metaphorical frame of reference. I'm sure he knows a mile is a mile, rocket surgeon.
Actually there's nothing in the constitution saying anything about granting rights only to people in the US.
So doing anything like you describe is grossly unconstitutional - of course I'm sure that doesn't stop anyone.
Unjustly going to prison? Are your chromosomes scrambled, corky? He stole and defrauded money from people. Are you a complete retard?
As for the rest of your little rambling dialog, I half agree with the part about Bush. They obviously want war and it's going to happen regardless of what anyone says. I think Bush is a maniac on this issue and Congress needs to strip him of any warmaking powers he may think he has left over from the first Iraqi conflict.
Your diatribe is pointless.
a.) They followed US law.
b.) They had no choice. In the US they could have gotten a warrant. In Russia they can't. They got their job done.
c.) Where have you been? Europeans have been wanting to arrest US officials for executions and other violations of "enlightened" European laws for a long time. Get a freaking clue.
Sharon is approximately 1/3 of the problem in the region. He's a hardline psychopath and he's only creating hatred in a large group of people who will continue to murder and commit suicide bombings because of their hatred.
He's also a fucking idiot. He's in the middle of a group of people who will soon outnumber Israeli's 2:1 or more, and he's sticking to his policy of absolute domination and force. He apparently hasn't studied much history.
It's easy to be a hardliner and blame all the death on your enemies, it's harder to watch the bodies pile up because your leader refuses to compromise over anything.
He's commited a few atrocities of his own over there - his hands aren't exactly clean.
Really, are people putting these on their resume's? Truly dweeby.
Remings me of the sigs you'll see where people describe their awesome dream machine they build. Who gives a flying, spattering shit what your hobbies are?
--
My Baby
Dual i386, with 64M(!!) overclocked 35Mhz memory and a SuperX VLB PCI card, hand build Linux OS (I call it TurdWare 1.0!).
You think Intel is in the compiler business? You are really sorely mistaken. They make chips. Everything else is done to further that goal.
Your little world view is made even more ridiculous by your complete ignorance.
Wow. So this must be some kind of amazing innovation, since almost every real operating system maker went with a real thread implementation using both user and kernel threads.
Ingo Molnar is I assume the smartest person in the Universe, and his reasoning instantly redecides the whole issue that many smart people at multiple large OS companies had though they'd mastered?
Linux - AIX II. "We know best, we'll redesign Unix from scratch!". In the meantime, as a developer I'll take HP-UX or Solaris anyday.
They can if they're mapped to N kernel threads.
Maybe that's because NT offers so much more of a low level object security model, and so many more features at that level?
You can gripe about NT at the gestalt OS level all you want (I don't, but I almost understand the mentality of those who do), but you have to admit that it's got a decent low-level architecture. Everything is an object and it's all got a complex set of controls, e.g. ACL's.n It's probably just not geared to high speed context switches.
Wow, is Linux finally becoming a Real Unix OS? I won't see 50 "processes" when I do a 'ps' on a machine running Java applications, which causes less-than-aware users to claim it's using 500 Megs of memory and 10 processes?
Thank God, but why so long? HP-UX, Solaris, etc... have had a working, stable M:N implementation forever, and it worked. Linux's whole crap about "Eh, we're smarter than they are we'll use kernel threads but make them faster" was until now a load of crap - hubris, if you ask me.
Anyway, thank freaking God they finally have it working right.
Did anyone read his "Foundation" series (by Asimov) book written after Asimov died? It was absolutely horrible.
He had the Hubris to make these inane, _wrong_, comments about all the mistakes Asimov made, and explain how he chose to write in his own (horrible) style instead. It was truly a bad book - Bear and Benford's were good.
He's a pompous douchebag - and I'm more convinced of that than ever after reading his facile little Salon articles.
Oooh, come down hard on them, huh?
For what? Advertising?
Does your browser run faster on a faster computer, including rendering? Yes.
Do in-browser applications run faster? Yes.
Which bus did you just fall out of, that you think "the internet" is just a bunch of bits on wires? In common parlance, it's an experience.
Wow, my bullshit sensor just went full-tilt. A certain tight loop, huh? Like this maybe:
while (true) {}
Seriously - there's no such "tight loop". It's bad code, or it can be done another way. Poor compiler optimization is no reason to go around half-cocked claiming the P4 performs '80 times slower'. Recompile with a real compiler, or optimize it.
And you think Hammer is going to mystically solve your problem? Either rewrite, reoptimize, or get a PA-RISC, or Sparc based machine. What kind of crap is this?
Whoopdy doo. Nobody's arguing that Perl isn't a good choice for things like that. You're munging text over HTTP. Wow. Probably your script was less than a few hundred lines (not including modules). Congratulations, you used a task-appropriate tool.
Besides, bad programmers write bad Java code just like bad Perl programmers do. That task could easily have been done with 2-5 Java classes, log4j, and not much more code than your Perl version, if any.
Umm, what? Java code complex, Perl code simple?
Did I just step into Bizarro reality?
First, badly written code is badly written code regardless of the language. There _can_ be good Perl code. Fine.
But Java is, umm, FREAKING TYPE SAFE. Duh. Type safety is one of the most important features of a language that's going to be used in large systems maintained by a number of people.
Most people who write "OO" wouldn't know good OO code if it bit them in the ass. And Perl is about as 'OO' as C.
Perl is perfect for some things - if you're handling lots of text, it's a short program, etc... But for enterprise applications? Client-server applications? Give me a freaking break, ya bunch of novices. Just because something _can_ be written in Perl doesn't mean it should be.
Wow - they were manufacturing products with 5 nanometer tolerances 40 years ago? Holy freaking wow, did you fly back in time and show them how to do it?
Amazing. And these laser turntables - they don't work? We should probably let the company know this and also the people who've bought them.
Yeah, you know everything...
It's much easier to be cynical, but I've always thought a cynic who was proven wrong looks even more stupid than a gullible fool who is proven wrong.
Wow, here we have some chimp systems admin who picked up Perl and started programming. Now he thinks anyone who uses are real software development language is an ivory tower do nothing, or an incompetent know-nothing CEO.
Truly, completely idiotic. Java a fad language, huh? For 8+ years? Wow, that's a long-lived fad. Are you completely daft?
What a true weiner. He sure made sure to tell everyone he's learning Japanese.
And he's also sure to make the (ostensibly tongue-in-cheak, but you're not fooling anyone) reference to his being a renaissance man. Umm, right. You're a regular DaVinci.
Any Harry Potter book to date is infinitely more readable and entertaining than American Gods.
Some people just feel more intelligent when they read what they consider to be "literature" over books that are entertaining.
Unfortunately, American Gods is mostly banal crap. Neverwhere was better.
I read this - it wasn't a great book. In fact, it was only barely readable.
Trite premise. Oh boy, Gods are created by how much their subjects worship them. How, umm, original. I like it better the first time when Captain Kirk was involved. At least then it had better dialog.
The melding of fantasy and reality didn't work. Some books are fantastic and yet seem "realistic" within the rules they lay down. This book just seemed cheesy.
Neverwhere was better. I read that first and thought maybe he was good - then American Gods came along and Peeeeeuw! Somethin' stinks in here!
What Microsoft did wasn't cut and dried illegal, especially at the time. Your comparison to a murder case is laughable - truly.
Second, Java on the client _everywhere_ is an idiotic idea, anyway. It's best for server applications - Microsoft didn't kill anything. Why in God's name do you need cross-platform compatibility when 98% of the client world runs on the same platform?!
Lastly, Java is far from dead, rocket surgeon. To extend your inane comparison, it's like Michael Skakel being found guilty after the victim walks into the court and says "Hey, uhh, I'm not dead!".
Sun hasn't a chance in court, thank God.