Google with its "peer review" (one link is one vote) kind of ranking system helped personal homepages. The good ones can sometimes be found even higher than fat commercial sites. I remember a time when the only way you would find good homepages was by browsing the bookmarks pages of someone you trusted to have good taste.
Bjarne Stroustrup: Yes. If every data can have any value, then it doesn't make much sense to have a class. Take a single data structure that has a name and an address. Any string is a good name, and any string is a good address. If that's what it is, it's a structure. Just call it a struct. Don't have anything private. Don't do anything silly like having a hidden name and address field with get_name and set_address and get_name and set_name functions. Or even worse, make a virtual base class with virtual get_name and set_name functions, and override it with the one and only representation. That's just elaboration. It's not necessary.
No! No! No! If you don't like the tedious task of writing the getters and setters, use an IDE which does this for you. But no structs that get used everywhere else. The other code has to know the struct's fields, and _if_ you have to change something (and there is always something), the struct approach requires numerous adjustments everywhere else. No good!
If you have a perfect architecture, all designed and documented, and no code will ever have to be reused, structs may look like a good idea. But in the real world that doesn't happen. With modern IDEs, there's no reason to avoid getters and setters.
About a year ago. There wasn't any punishment I'm aware of, but the network people didn't like the fact that they got quite a lot of those mails (big university, and obviously many people sharing).
If you disagree, please explain why Kevin Costner has a "Best Director" award but not Stanley Kubrick, Alfred Hitchcock or Akira Kurosawa?
The Oscars aren't fair.
The fact that it depends a lot on your fellow nominees in a particular year (tough / weak competition) was already mentioned in this thread.
However, one of the main reasons for the lack of fairness - look who's picking nominees, and who's picking the winners. Directors who are members of the AMPAS pick the nominees, all AMPAS members (~6,000) vote for the winner.
So if directors like or dislike a particular fellow (competitor) director, he may be nominated although he doesn't deserve it (or the other way around, may not be nominated although he deserves it).
Even if a worthy director gets nominated, all 6,000 AMPAS members vote on the award. Every sound engineer, actor, producer who may know nothing about directing has a vote. It's a miracle that sometimes the right people do get the award.
And for those who never get a real Oscar, there's still the life time achievement award.;-)
Google has done a pretty good job of keeping the e-commerce sites out of my listings,
Recently, I don't think that's true anymore. At least from my experience. If you search for anything remotely similar to a product or service, you may run into special spam link farms for the search terms you looked for in the top ten of the Google results. Sure, you can report these with the 'Dissatisfied?' link at the bottom, but that's tedious, probably not too many people use that, because it doesn't seem to improve the system much. Over all, Google isn't working as well as it used to. Simply because some SEO people have figured how to manipulate it. It's sad, but as with spam, the fight has to continue.
Like it or not, Windows is predominant on the desktop. If you want to teach students basic computer skills, Windows is the pragmatist's choice. Besides, some things are equal for both operating systems, so adjusting to Linux isn't that hard.
For example, there are a lot of mislabeled MP3s -- either the tags are "Unknown Artist / Track 8" or they're completely misspelled. Or you sometimes get the annoying thing where they're ripped from a compilation and the tags reflect that: the author is "Greatest Dance Hits" or even "Pottery Barn"
MP3 ID3 tags can be matched against long lists of known song titles and group / artist names. Such lists exist, e.g. at FreeDB.org.
Another need is that you might know a few lyrics of a song but not know who it's by or what it's called.
Again, match against data collections. A huge indexed collection of lyrics is enough. These days, when looking for the name of a song it's more often than not enough to enter lyrics $text-you-are-looking-for into Google.
Google has a bunch of smart people working for it, but I don't know if they'd necessarily have a head start on this problem. It's not the same as indexing the web.
It's not the same, but it's quite possible and a lot of Google's existing technology can be reused. I've often searched for PDFs in P2P systems. It's a great help if these are indexed for full text, something Google is doing already.
However, I'm not so optimistic about solving the legal problems as some other participants in this discussion.
Everybody is using German roads in central Europe to go from A to B, but hardly anyone buys their gas there. So the taxes go God knows where, but Germany gets nothing.
I don't think the average consumer will do any boycotting as the result. The girl is quickly forgotten, the fear of being sued isn't.
This article is great at scaring parents, and others as well. I'm pretty sure quite a few people will ensure that no files get shared on their computers anymore. **AA mission accomplished.
The article says: The family signed up for the Kazaa (search) music-swapping service three months ago, and paid a $29.99 service charge. So why isn't the family (read: the parents) sued? In the end, they are responsible for their children's doings anyway. Besides, does anybody still truly think trading copyrighted material is legal? It may be a nice (if weak) defense, but I have my doubts believing that, with all those 'awareness campaigns' the **AAs are running.
Kazaa has become an abondanded street filled with hookers and the black market. If you don't want the law to clean up your street then you better do it yourself.
I wouldn't go that far. IMO a simple warning when the program is started for the first time makes sense. It's just for those people who (1) don't automatically click anything away without looking at it and (2) didn't know that there is pornography in the system, some of it even labeled as a Disney movie. Hopefully the intersection of both sets of people isn't empty, then a warning may do some good. I don't think that the creators of P2P software would have a problem with that.
I enjoy doing that in real life, but 'typing small talk' seems to be a major waste of time to me. Simply because I have to put on hold what I was doing and answer, then go back to work, and so on. I'm not that good at multi-tasking. Real life small talk is nothing like that.
Another reason against the online version of small talk: tons of people tend to pile up in IM buddy lists, leading to a lot more small talk than you would ever have in real life.
It's not fully on-topic, but why do people use IM, and not simply email? In my experience, IM leads to a lot of unnecessary conversation. People see that you are online (unless you want to play hide and seek with those invisibility features) and feel the need to say something. You are forced to reply, etc. A lot of unnecessary email gets sent too, but I have the feeling people need at least some small reason for a mail, while there are no obstacles for sending IMs.
If there is a real need for a real-time conversation and telephone is too expensive or unavailable, or more than two people are to be involved, a private IRC channel could be opened.
I'd just like to know if others here have had a more positive IM experience. Are there any advantages I'm not aware of?
The interview sounds like MS would honor the X-No-Archive: yes header. However, there are people in newsgroups I read who have always set this header, and they're still in MSs system. Doesn't really seem to work.
However, the really good "answer people" usually don't have this set, so it may not change much for the quality of the system. Still annoying.
2. Automatically negotiate ad hoc networks with passersby, immediately establishing whether or not they are similar or dissimilar to you based on MP3 collections, web bookmarks, etc.
There is no real interactivity, but Google sometimes encodes links in search result pages in a way so that it can log which links are actually clicked on. Simply by replacing http://site.com/page.html with http://google.com/query+terms+encoded+here/referer/site.com/page.html (or something like that, you get the idea - Google gets the hit, logs it and then forwards the requesting client to the real page).
Other search engines do this all the time.
However, I remember one Google employee saying in an interview that this information is not integrated in the actual search engine - yet.
But if MS makes it possible for every dingbat melonhead with a modem to get on it, it's going to get much worse.
But isn't that already the case? Most people use Outlook (or Outlook Express? I never got the difference) and they can access newsgroups already. In some cases this attracts some annoying people, but there are a lot of stubborn, annoying slrn/gnus/yourfavouriteunixnewsreader users as well.
The other thing is that USEnet has (so far) been flying below the **AA's radar as far as file sharing and software IP ifringement go. If they all of a sudden turn their attention towards it, USEnet is easy prey for a takedown: the servers are centralized machines that are easily traceable to a company or individual, and most ISPs would probably just take theirs down rather than fight it out with the RIAA.
I also wondered why the *AAs never attacked ISPs on binary newsgroups. But my guess is that ISPs would just remove the binary groups. It's not that hard to do that. I also didn't get why ISPs bother to carry binary newsgroups. They generate a lot of traffic, and I'm not so sure that they are the reason for people to subscribe.
I think Google's contribution is more in the area of availability and searchability (if that is a word;-)) of postings. If I remember a discussion that was in one of my subscribed groups in the recent X days (X being the time before messages are deleted), I'm usually quicker just full text searching in my news client than going to Google Groups. But I don't have 700 million+ postings, and I guess my news client wouldn't scale well to that number if I did.
If I find interesting discussions on Google Groups that have more than 10 postings and are likely to still be on my news server, I always get the messages to read them with my news client. Way more comfortable.
... which broadcasts to (almost) every other ISP in the world.
Almost every other ISP? I highly doubt it. Are binary groups to be found anywhere but on for-pay services which get subscriptions exactly for this reason, the availability of copyrighted material?
Slashdot Mirror
is more about geolocation than mapping, but I guess I deserve at least a passing mention :-)
/opt/www/net/www.hostip.info/add.html on line 83
Not really, it can't even guess the country from my host name (which has a two letter TLD).
And when I provide the information all I get is
Warning: mysql_fetch_row(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in
Google with its "peer review" (one link is one vote) kind of ranking system helped personal homepages. The good ones can sometimes be found even higher than fat commercial sites. I remember a time when the only way you would find good homepages was by browsing the bookmarks pages of someone you trusted to have good taste.
Bjarne Stroustrup: Yes. If every data can have any value, then it doesn't make much sense to have a class. Take a single data structure that has a name and an address. Any string is a good name, and any string is a good address. If that's what it is, it's a structure. Just call it a struct. Don't have anything private. Don't do anything silly like having a hidden name and address field with get_name and set_address and get_name and set_name functions. Or even worse, make a virtual base class with virtual get_name and set_name functions, and override it with the one and only representation. That's just elaboration. It's not necessary.
No! No! No! If you don't like the tedious task of writing the getters and setters, use an IDE which does this for you. But no structs that get used everywhere else. The other code has to know the struct's fields, and _if_ you have to change something (and there is always something), the struct approach requires numerous adjustments everywhere else. No good!
If you have a perfect architecture, all designed and documented, and no code will ever have to be reused, structs may look like a good idea. But in the real world that doesn't happen. With modern IDEs, there's no reason to avoid getters and setters.
If Ralsky is on a street corner someone identified him to the public as a spammer, I wonder how long until the police and/or ambulance arrive?
Don't be too sure. Lynch mobs aren't what they used to be. Back in my day...
About a year ago. There wasn't any punishment I'm aware of, but the network people didn't like the fact that they got quite a lot of those mails (big university, and obviously many people sharing).
64meg chunk size is pretty huge, but I'm guessing that's blocked out based on continual threads of data, not typical files.
64 MB is the maximum chunk size. The assumptions section at the beginning talks about typical read/write operations working on about 1 MB.
I thought the Google dance was history, and the index is now being updated more continuously (how exactly, I don't know)?
If you disagree, please explain why Kevin Costner has a "Best Director" award but not Stanley Kubrick, Alfred Hitchcock or Akira Kurosawa?
;-)
The Oscars aren't fair.
The fact that it depends a lot on your fellow nominees in a particular year (tough / weak competition) was already mentioned in this thread.
However, one of the main reasons for the lack of fairness - look who's picking nominees, and who's picking the winners. Directors who are members of the AMPAS pick the nominees, all AMPAS members (~6,000) vote for the winner.
So if directors like or dislike a particular fellow (competitor) director, he may be nominated although he doesn't deserve it (or the other way around, may not be nominated although he deserves it).
Even if a worthy director gets nominated, all 6,000 AMPAS members vote on the award. Every sound engineer, actor, producer who may know nothing about directing has a vote. It's a miracle that sometimes the right people do get the award.
And for those who never get a real Oscar, there's still the life time achievement award.
Google has done a pretty good job of keeping the e-commerce sites out of my listings,
Recently, I don't think that's true anymore. At least from my experience. If you search for anything remotely similar to a product or service, you may run into special spam link farms for the search terms you looked for in the top ten of the Google results. Sure, you can report these with the 'Dissatisfied?' link at the bottom, but that's tedious, probably not too many people use that, because it doesn't seem to improve the system much. Over all, Google isn't working as well as it used to. Simply because some SEO people have figured how to manipulate it. It's sad, but as with spam, the fight has to continue.
Like it or not, Windows is predominant on the desktop. If you want to teach students basic computer skills, Windows is the pragmatist's choice. Besides, some things are equal for both operating systems, so adjusting to Linux isn't that hard.
For example, there are a lot of mislabeled MP3s -- either the tags are "Unknown Artist / Track 8" or they're completely misspelled. Or you sometimes get the annoying thing where they're ripped from a compilation and the tags reflect that: the author is "Greatest Dance Hits" or even "Pottery Barn"
MP3 ID3 tags can be matched against long lists of known song titles and group / artist names. Such lists exist, e.g. at FreeDB.org.
Another need is that you might know a few lyrics of a song but not know who it's by or what it's called.
Again, match against data collections. A huge indexed collection of lyrics is enough. These days, when looking for the name of a song it's more often than not enough to enter lyrics $text-you-are-looking-for into Google.
Google has a bunch of smart people working for it, but I don't know if they'd necessarily have a head start on this problem. It's not the same as indexing the web.
It's not the same, but it's quite possible and a lot of Google's existing technology can be reused. I've often searched for PDFs in P2P systems. It's a great help if these are indexed for full text, something Google is doing already.
However, I'm not so optimistic about solving the legal problems as some other participants in this discussion.
Everybody is using German roads in central Europe to go from A to B, but hardly anyone buys their gas there. So the taxes go God knows where, but Germany gets nothing.
I don't think the average consumer will do any boycotting as the result. The girl is quickly forgotten, the fear of being sued isn't.
This article is great at scaring parents, and others as well. I'm pretty sure quite a few people will ensure that no files get shared on their computers anymore. **AA mission accomplished.
The article says: The family signed up for the Kazaa (search) music-swapping service three months ago, and paid a $29.99 service charge. So why isn't the family (read: the parents) sued? In the end, they are responsible for their children's doings anyway. Besides, does anybody still truly think trading copyrighted material is legal? It may be a nice (if weak) defense, but I have my doubts believing that, with all those 'awareness campaigns' the **AAs are running.
Kazaa has become an abondanded street filled with hookers and the black market. If you don't want the law to clean up your street then you better do it yourself.
I wouldn't go that far. IMO a simple warning when the program is started for the first time makes sense. It's just for those people who (1) don't automatically click anything away without looking at it and (2) didn't know that there is pornography in the system, some of it even labeled as a Disney movie. Hopefully the intersection of both sets of people isn't empty, then a warning may do some good. I don't think that the creators of P2P software would have a problem with that.
I understand Freenet was a school project and that you got a B. Who got the A that year?
Some Finn who had the crazy idea of writing a Unix-like kernel for the x86 platform. Never heard of that guy again...
I enjoy doing that in real life, but 'typing small talk' seems to be a major waste of time to me. Simply because I have to put on hold what I was doing and answer, then go back to work, and so on. I'm not that good at multi-tasking. Real life small talk is nothing like that.
Another reason against the online version of small talk: tons of people tend to pile up in IM buddy lists, leading to a lot more small talk than you would ever have in real life.
It's not fully on-topic, but why do people use IM, and not simply email? In my experience, IM leads to a lot of unnecessary conversation. People see that you are online (unless you want to play hide and seek with those invisibility features) and feel the need to say something. You are forced to reply, etc. A lot of unnecessary email gets sent too, but I have the feeling people need at least some small reason for a mail, while there are no obstacles for sending IMs.
If there is a real need for a real-time conversation and telephone is too expensive or unavailable, or more than two people are to be involved, a private IRC channel could be opened.
I'd just like to know if others here have had a more positive IM experience. Are there any advantages I'm not aware of?
The interview sounds like MS would honor the X-No-Archive: yes header. However, there are people in newsgroups I read who have always set this header, and they're still in MSs system. Doesn't really seem to work.
However, the really good "answer people" usually don't have this set, so it may not change much for the quality of the system. Still annoying.
2. Automatically negotiate ad hoc networks with passersby, immediately establishing whether or not they are similar or dissimilar to you based on MP3 collections, web bookmarks, etc.
I don't want to meet people like me.
I just came across that new Google feature, the calculator.
I'd only wish that there was better documentation, 'radius of earth' isn't exactly something you stumble upon by accident.
There is no real interactivity, but Google sometimes encodes links in search result pages in a way so that it can log which links are actually clicked on. Simply by replacing http://site.com/page.html with http://google.com/query+terms+encoded+here/referer /site.com/page.html (or something like that, you get the idea - Google gets the hit, logs it and then forwards the requesting client to the real page).
Other search engines do this all the time.
However, I remember one Google employee saying in an interview that this information is not integrated in the actual search engine - yet.
But if MS makes it possible for every dingbat melonhead with a modem to get on it, it's going to get much worse.
But isn't that already the case? Most people use Outlook (or Outlook Express? I never got the difference) and they can access newsgroups already. In some cases this attracts some annoying people, but there are a lot of stubborn, annoying slrn/gnus/yourfavouriteunixnewsreader users as well.
The other thing is that USEnet has (so far) been flying below the **AA's radar as far as file sharing and software IP ifringement go. If they all of a sudden turn their attention towards it, USEnet is easy prey for a takedown: the servers are centralized machines that are easily traceable to a company or individual, and most ISPs would probably just take theirs down rather than fight it out with the RIAA.
I also wondered why the *AAs never attacked ISPs on binary newsgroups. But my guess is that ISPs would just remove the binary groups. It's not that hard to do that. I also didn't get why ISPs bother to carry binary newsgroups. They generate a lot of traffic, and I'm not so sure that they are the reason for people to subscribe.
I think Google's contribution is more in the area of availability and searchability (if that is a word ;-)) of postings. If I remember a discussion that was in one of my subscribed groups in the recent X days (X being the time before messages are deleted), I'm usually quicker just full text searching in my news client than going to Google Groups. But I don't have 700 million+ postings, and I guess my news client wouldn't scale well to that number if I did.
If I find interesting discussions on Google Groups that have more than 10 postings and are likely to still be on my news server, I always get the messages to read them with my news client. Way more comfortable.
... which broadcasts to (almost) every other ISP in the world.
Almost every other ISP? I highly doubt it. Are binary groups to be found anywhere but on for-pay services which get subscriptions exactly for this reason, the availability of copyrighted material?