cmd.exe is a terrible shell. The new Powershell Microsoft has is pretty nice. I like it more than Unix shells. I find passing objects between commands to be easier. Now Microsoft just needs to dump their console.
The study of physics doesn't need math. Humans were studying physics before they could talk. If I throw the rock this way it makes it to the tree. If I throw it a second way it makes it to that rock. I would consider that the study of physics.
A lot of maths were created by physicists to study physics. No physics were created to study maths.
I always see the comment that most bugs are from memory mismanagement and pointers. I've been writing large C++ applications for 10 years. The most common bugs I see are usually fall into two groups. One group is very simple isolated logic errors and typos. The next group are from unknown side-effects from calling libraries/modules the programmer is not familiar with.
C++ is amazingly good at hiding these side-effects. Frequently, even though code is broken up into different modules, a programmer needs to have a full understanding of all the other modules the module they are working on uses or is used by.
This problem seems to be compounded with the increasing popularity of "event-driven" programming. I've worked on two systems that use event-driven programming and it is a pain to code for and really a pain to debug. I've seen some nasty hard to fix bugs from circular event cycles. The reason for these was because the programmer did not have a full understanding of all the modules that sent and received events from the module he was working on.
A recent application I worked on used QT slots and signals for ALL communication between classes. I had to spend a large amount of time understanding the whole system and figuring out what classes received what signals just to fix something that turned out to be a 2 line code change. The signal was propagated through several classes before it got to the class that really did the work.
It seems that programmers are trying to take things that work well in GUIs and forcing them on the code that does the algorithm code behind the GUI. Object-oriented and event-driven is really nice for GUI programming, it can make programming non-GUI elements of an application very difficult. Some problems just aren't OO, yet when a program is determined to be OO, everything is forced down that path no matter how ugly the OO design is.
What we need is an easier way to use the methodology that best fits the current problem. The problem is that no language allows you to use different methodologies effectively. Some problems map very well to the functional methodology, yet it is not easy to do using C++.
If different languages could work together easier, it would help. Then the proper language and methodology could be used for the given module. Managers would then complain that they would need to find programmers that knew more than one language, so it won't happen. I'm waiting for C++HaskLog. Then programmers will be able to use procedural, OO, functional or logic programming all in one language.
I'm curious about what people's reactions would be if it read "Bong hits 4 Allah". Would the student then be chastised for hate speech against Muslims?
Re:Regenerative braking on the front wheel
on
The Hybrid Scooter
·
· Score: 1
Around 75% of a motorcycle's breaking comes from the front wheel. Locking the front tire on a street bike usually just causes it to fall over, low-side crash.
Locking the back wheel then releasing it without comming to a complete stop can result in a high-side crash where the rider gets thrown over the bike.
High-side crashes are usually much worse for the rider.
I don't think Photoshop is successful because of it's "outstanding" interface. People use Photoshop because it is very good at image editing. Photoshop is an example of; if your application is very good at something, people will use it inspite of it's crappy interface.
For simple image editing/processing I use iPhoto first, since it is very easy. If I need a little more I'll use Photoshop.
I personally hate these monolithic applications. I much prefer the iLife flow with simple, more specialized applications to complete my workflow. I edit a movie in iMove then go to iDVD to author the DVD. It works out much better then trying to shoehorn DVD authoring and movie editing into a single application.
Your analogy of a programmer to a plumber is not accurate. A programmer would be more like a welder. Building a motocycle frame requires welding, but you wouldn't expect any welder to be able to make a stable motocycle frame.
Programming is a low level tool, the real value is domain knowledge for the area the problem lies in. If you need someone to write accounting software just hireing a programmer is not enough, unless you are going to tell them exactly how to do it. You need an accountant with programming skills or the willingness to train the programmer in the accounting domain.
Well, there is nothing left to study. The Earth is warming, it's from greenhouse gases do to human activity. The solution is to stop human production of greenhouse gases. All money that has been going to research global warming should go to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
No, it isn't blue. That is an over-simplistic descrition of the sky just like this artical is an over-simplistic description of the link between global warming and hurricanes.
So how much water vapor is produce from burning hydrogen? Water vapor holds in much more heat that other greenhouse gases. What will pumping all that extra water vapor into the air going to do? If pumping all the extra CO2 in the air is a problem, why won't pumping tons of extra water vapor into air be one?
I remember them. Object Desktop and Galactic Civilizations for OS/2. When I see Stardock I always remember my old OS/2 machine. Then I remember that damn single input queue on the otherwise nice (at the time) UI. One app would always hang the stupid UI.
The safety features don't make a difference if people just drive more aggressivly to what the safety features will allow. It might even be worse since people can drive faster and turn more erradically then they could without these features.
I don't think it is our treating of genetic disorders. I think it is our overly compassionate actions disrupting human evolution. We don't let the weaker of our species die. We take care of them allowing them to reproduce. I don't think humans are evolving at all in the modern era. From my experience, the more intelligent the person, the less children then have, or none at all.
Compassion is a great trait the helped humans get to where we are. I wonder if we haven't become too compassionate as a species. Eventually leading to our downfall as a species. There are possibly too many dependent people, if too many of the produces die, the whole species might die during a global catastrophy. How many people can hunt/grow food to survive?
I can't say I've seen an equation that uses UTC. Most astrodynamic equations I've seen use Terrestrial Time. Linking time to the position of the sun is silly for accurate time keeping.
GPS doesn't use leap seconds for anything. GPS time is the number of atomic seconds since 02/06/80 00:00:00 GMT. Leap seconds are only used to to convert from GPS to UTC. If UTC didn't use leap seconds the conversion wouldn't require looking up all leap seconds that have been added since the GPS epoch.
I'm not sure why they baselined GPS time to a UTC epoch. If they wanted to keep the second count down, just offset from atomic time. Like how Modified Julian Date was created because Julian Date was getting kind of large, and someone liked midnight over noon.
What you propose just redefines UTC to be atomic time plus some offset, and creates something new that is exactly what UTC is now. It just shifts the problems around a little.
Try converting between, Atomic Time, GPS time, UTC, Universal Time, Julian Days, Modified Julian Days, Terestial Dynamical Time, Barycenter Dynamical Time, Epoch 2000 time, Unix epoch time.
I use it to plan hikes. This, some topographic maps and a GPS remove a lot of unknowns from a hike I've never done before. Unfortunately, not all locations have the higher resolution imagery.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Bits _vs_qubits "This dramatic advantage of quantum computers is currently known to exist for only those three problems: factoring, discrete log, and quantum physics simulations."
I don't see Quake 10 on the list, so what's the point?
Slashdot Mirror
http://money.cnn.com/2010/05/07/markets/explaining_wall_street_turmoil/
cmd.exe is a terrible shell. The new Powershell Microsoft has is pretty nice. I like it more than Unix shells. I find passing objects between commands to be easier. Now Microsoft just needs to dump their console.
Bah, I used vi and LaTeX in college.
The study of physics doesn't need math. Humans were studying physics before they could talk. If I throw the rock this way it makes it to the tree. If I throw it a second way it makes it to that rock. I would consider that the study of physics.
A lot of maths were created by physicists to study physics. No physics were created to study maths.
You completely nailed my childhood. Except we jumped up and down in the back seat of the car.
You want to exterminate people because you think they want to exterminate other people. Interesting. In reality your just a bigot yourself.
I always see the comment that most bugs are from memory mismanagement and pointers. I've been writing large C++ applications for 10 years. The most common bugs I see are usually fall into two groups. One group is very simple isolated logic errors and typos. The next group are from unknown side-effects from calling libraries/modules the programmer is not familiar with.
C++ is amazingly good at hiding these side-effects. Frequently, even though code is broken up into different modules, a programmer needs to have a full understanding of all the other modules the module they are working on uses or is used by.
This problem seems to be compounded with the increasing popularity of "event-driven" programming. I've worked on two systems that use event-driven programming and it is a pain to code for and really a pain to debug. I've seen some nasty hard to fix bugs from circular event cycles. The reason for these was because the programmer did not have a full understanding of all the modules that sent and received events from the module he was working on.
A recent application I worked on used QT slots and signals for ALL communication between classes. I had to spend a large amount of time understanding the whole system and figuring out what classes received what signals just to fix something that turned out to be a 2 line code change. The signal was propagated through several classes before it got to the class that really did the work.
It seems that programmers are trying to take things that work well in GUIs and forcing them on the code that does the algorithm code behind the GUI. Object-oriented and event-driven is really nice for GUI programming, it can make programming non-GUI elements of an application very difficult. Some problems just aren't OO, yet when a program is determined to be OO, everything is forced down that path no matter how ugly the OO design is.
What we need is an easier way to use the methodology that best fits the current problem. The problem is that no language allows you to use different methodologies effectively. Some problems map very well to the functional methodology, yet it is not easy to do using C++.
If different languages could work together easier, it would help. Then the proper language and methodology could be used for the given module. Managers would then complain that they would need to find programmers that knew more than one language, so it won't happen. I'm waiting for C++HaskLog. Then programmers will be able to use procedural, OO, functional or logic programming all in one language.
I'm curious about what people's reactions would be if it read "Bong hits 4 Allah". Would the student then be chastised for hate speech against Muslims?
Around 75% of a motorcycle's breaking comes from the front wheel. Locking the front tire on a street bike usually just causes it to fall over, low-side crash.
Locking the back wheel then releasing it without comming to a complete stop can result in a high-side crash where the rider gets thrown over the bike.
High-side crashes are usually much worse for the rider.
I don't think Photoshop is successful because of it's "outstanding" interface. People use Photoshop because it is very good at image editing. Photoshop is an example of; if your application is very good at something, people will use it inspite of it's crappy interface.
For simple image editing/processing I use iPhoto first, since it is very easy. If I need a little more I'll use Photoshop.
I personally hate these monolithic applications. I much prefer the iLife flow with simple, more specialized applications to complete my workflow. I edit a movie in iMove then go to iDVD to author the DVD. It works out much better then trying to shoehorn DVD authoring and movie editing into a single application.
Your analogy of a programmer to a plumber is not accurate. A programmer would be more like a welder. Building a motocycle frame requires welding, but you wouldn't expect any welder to be able to make a stable motocycle frame.
Programming is a low level tool, the real value is domain knowledge for the area the problem lies in. If you need someone to write accounting software just hireing a programmer is not enough, unless you are going to tell them exactly how to do it. You need an accountant with programming skills or the willingness to train the programmer in the accounting domain.
Well, there is nothing left to study. The Earth is warming, it's from greenhouse gases do to human activity. The solution is to stop human production of greenhouse gases. All money that has been going to research global warming should go to reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
No, it isn't blue. That is an over-simplistic descrition of the sky just like this artical is an over-simplistic description of the link between global warming and hurricanes.
So how much water vapor is produce from burning hydrogen? Water vapor holds in much more heat that other greenhouse gases. What will pumping all that extra water vapor into the air going to do? If pumping all the extra CO2 in the air is a problem, why won't pumping tons of extra water vapor into air be one?
I remember them. Object Desktop and Galactic Civilizations for OS/2. When I see Stardock I always remember my old OS/2 machine. Then I remember that damn single input queue on the otherwise nice (at the time) UI. One app would always hang the stupid UI.
The safety features don't make a difference if people just drive more aggressivly to what the safety features will allow. It might even be worse since people can drive faster and turn more erradically then they could without these features.
Damn, I thought no teeth in women was more sexually appealing.
I'm sure some women could think of an extra appendage on men more sexually appealing that wasn't for controlling a mouse as well.
I don't think it is our treating of genetic disorders. I think it is our overly compassionate actions disrupting human evolution. We don't let the weaker of our species die. We take care of them allowing them to reproduce. I don't think humans are evolving at all in the modern era. From my experience, the more intelligent the person, the less children then have, or none at all.
Compassion is a great trait the helped humans get to where we are. I wonder if we haven't become too compassionate as a species. Eventually leading to our downfall as a species. There are possibly too many dependent people, if too many of the produces die, the whole species might die during a global catastrophy. How many people can hunt/grow food to survive?
Uhhh, Rehnquist disented on the eminent domain case, if you are talking about the 2005, Kelo v. New London case.
It was the more liberal judges the gave move power to the government.
I can't say I've seen an equation that uses UTC. Most astrodynamic equations I've seen use Terrestrial Time. Linking time to the position of the sun is silly for accurate time keeping.
GPS doesn't use leap seconds for anything. GPS time is the number of atomic seconds since 02/06/80 00:00:00 GMT. Leap seconds are only used to to convert from GPS to UTC. If UTC didn't use leap seconds the conversion wouldn't require looking up all leap seconds that have been added since the GPS epoch.
I'm not sure why they baselined GPS time to a UTC epoch. If they wanted to keep the second count down, just offset from atomic time. Like how Modified Julian Date was created because Julian Date was getting kind of large, and someone liked midnight over noon.
What you propose just redefines UTC to be atomic time plus some offset, and creates something new that is exactly what UTC is now. It just shifts the problems around a little.
Daylight savings time?
Try converting between, Atomic Time, GPS time, UTC, Universal Time, Julian Days, Modified Julian Days, Terestial Dynamical Time, Barycenter Dynamical Time, Epoch 2000 time, Unix epoch time.
I'd love to just have to handle daylight savings.
I use it to plan hikes. This, some topographic maps and a GPS remove a lot of unknowns from a hike I've never done before. Unfortunately, not all locations have the higher resolution imagery.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computer#Bits _vs_qubits
"This dramatic advantage of quantum computers is currently known to exist for only those three problems: factoring, discrete log, and quantum physics simulations."
I don't see Quake 10 on the list, so what's the point?