I think this is one of the most sensible things I ever read: I mean, a computer program is build with the intention to solve a problem, right? If that problem is solved, why should people keep wasting their time twitching things ad nauseam?
Of course people would continue to develop on top of Perl, but Perl 6.0 would be the point of reference, the minimum to which any other implementation would have to stick to be able to call itself Perl at all.
Once I wore jeans, a plain white shirt and sports shoes. I was unshaved and not very presentable to be honest (I had just finished a frenzied week installing some 200 Sun machines. From opening many of the boxes and puting many of the monitors in place myself to Jumpstarting all the things).
I got my first decently paid job like that!
Another time I wore chinos, denim shirt while all the other guys (because they had the bad taste to interview us the same day, at more less the same hour, each applicant being interviewed by a different interviewer) where wearing nice suits. I got the job.
Secret: I know my stuff and don't tell lies in the CV, if I am ignorant I admit it, but I would not be applying for a contract I could not handle right?
Funnily enough the 2 interviews I ever wore a suit I was not choosen....
Don't dress well. You don't want to work for a company that gives a damn about how you dress. I made a practice not to dress well (but I am always clean!). I want a boss that can look beyond apeareances! So far it has worked, even in very conservative environments (banks).
You can't keep building power plants for ever. It is just plain ridiculous that California requiries so much energy while other states in the US are inhabited only by 3 or 4 Unabombers.
The cleanest power is not nuclear: after using the nuclear fuel, developed countries are bribing 3rd World countries to dump their nuclear waste there so you don't see the waste but surely will be complaining in 20 years time when a new wave of Mexican immigrants reach ths US because children are being born without brain in their home towns (which is not a joke, it is already happening). Or even worst, the nuclear waste is dumped in colonies or protectorates 1000miles away as has done France. Recent problems in Japan and Britain handling nuclear fuel shows how dangerous this stuff is, even in the hands of supposedly well trained people.
The clean alternatives are hydraulic, solar, wind, wave, geothermal, even natural gas and others, but goverments are not prepared to give incentives for their early development because the stablished industries lobby them quite hard to keep the status quo.
Go and live in one of the Revolution paradises for a couple of years (Cuba, Vietnam, North Corea, even China, but quickly, before they dismantle the paradise because it seems like it does not work).
Then say something critical about the goverments there (no, wait, they are perfect, nothing to criticize).
Then you do come back and repeat the same discourse.
Oh sorry, I forgot that those things about Stalin murdering who knows how many millions are propaganda.
I guess Stalin would have loved the Internet and promoted the freedom of expression it brings with it. Like , er..., China?
Yous houls wonder why there are so many poeple that would post with their guts and not their brains. Dealing with MS is not anymore something rational, because such entity does not understand rational arguments.
Although the points raised could be valid, the credibility of the meesanger has to be taken into account, one should guess always the motives of a corporation that has been found to practice monopolistic tricks when they issue such statements.
Think hos MS could benefit, then think about the consequences. Some people don't like it and thus can see no good in even the most serious MS statements.
In the dark ages of Mexican democracy, the election of 1988 was most probably lost by the ruling party (how do we know? nobody could find a friend or relative that voted for them!). In the middle of the counting, the central computer counting the votes crashed and oh miracle, when it was back the ruling party had won the election...
So beware of centralized electronic systems, that just makes much easier the task of somebody trying to tamper the results (high risk of single point of failure I would say).
1.- Would we be able to read/write files in lets say a ZIP drive, take the disk, and read it in another drive?
2.- Would we be able to read or modify a file created in a different machine?
I don't care about the OS or the applications, I will use wathever is best, but I do care about my data, how much these proposals could restrict the control of my own data?
One thing does not exclude the other: bad science gets far too much credit thanks to the media (crystals, horoscops, pyramid's powers, alien abduction, etc.) and good science can be cornered by sckeptic scientists. But the results are far different: bad science accepted at face value is useles at least, harmful at worst.
Real science in the other hand has to be rigurously proved before it is accepted as truth. Einstein had to write down E=m*c*c (with all the analysis) before making ludicrous claims!
Slashdot Mirror
I think this is one of the most sensible things I ever read: I mean, a computer program is build with the intention to solve a problem, right? If that problem is solved, why should people keep wasting their time twitching things ad nauseam?
Of course people would continue to develop on top of Perl, but Perl 6.0 would be the point of reference, the minimum to which any other implementation would have to stick to be able to call itself Perl at all.
Once I wore jeans, a plain white shirt and sports shoes. I was unshaved and not very presentable to be honest (I had just finished a frenzied week installing some 200 Sun machines. From opening many of the boxes and puting many of the monitors in place myself to Jumpstarting all the things).
I got my first decently paid job like that!
Another time I wore chinos, denim shirt while all the other guys (because they had the bad taste to interview us the same day, at more less the same hour, each applicant being interviewed by a different interviewer) where wearing nice suits. I got the job.
Secret: I know my stuff and don't tell lies in the CV, if I am ignorant I admit it, but I would not be applying for a contract I could not handle right?
Funnily enough the 2 interviews I ever wore a suit I was not choosen....
Don't dress well. You don't want to work for a company that gives a damn about how you dress. I made a practice not to dress well (but I am always clean!). I want a boss that can look beyond apeareances! So far it has worked, even in very conservative environments (banks).
You can't keep building power plants for ever. It is just plain ridiculous that California requiries so much energy while other states in the US are inhabited only by 3 or 4 Unabombers.
The cleanest power is not nuclear: after using the nuclear fuel, developed countries are bribing 3rd World countries to dump their nuclear waste there so you don't see the waste but surely will be complaining in 20 years time when a new wave of Mexican immigrants reach ths US because children are being born without brain in their home towns (which is not a joke, it is already happening). Or even worst, the nuclear waste is dumped in colonies or protectorates 1000miles away as has done France. Recent problems in Japan and Britain handling nuclear fuel shows how dangerous this stuff is, even in the hands of supposedly well trained people.
The clean alternatives are hydraulic, solar, wind, wave, geothermal, even natural gas and others, but goverments are not prepared to give incentives for their early development because the stablished industries lobby them quite hard to keep the status quo.
Go and live in one of the Revolution paradises for a couple of years (Cuba, Vietnam, North Corea, even China, but quickly, before they dismantle the paradise because it seems like it does not work).
Then say something critical about the goverments there (no, wait, they are perfect, nothing to criticize).
Then you do come back and repeat the same discourse.
Oh sorry, I forgot that those things about Stalin murdering who knows how many millions are propaganda.
I guess Stalin would have loved the Internet and promoted the freedom of expression it brings with it. Like , er..., China?
Yous houls wonder why there are so many poeple that would post with their guts and not their brains. Dealing with MS is not anymore something rational, because such entity does not understand rational arguments.
Although the points raised could be valid, the credibility of the meesanger has to be taken into account, one should guess always the motives of a corporation that has been found to practice monopolistic tricks when they issue such statements.
Think hos MS could benefit, then think about the consequences. Some people don't like it and thus can see no good in even the most serious MS statements.
.... with cases with neon lights and Windows, I mean, windows, you know, those transparent things you can use to see through other surfaces.
In this case one can look at the motherboard and the expansion cards! Watch them while they work!
Absolutely mind blowin' stuff!
It of course can happen.
In the dark ages of Mexican democracy, the election of 1988 was most probably lost by the ruling party (how do we know? nobody could find a friend or relative that voted for them!). In the middle of the counting, the central computer counting the votes crashed and oh miracle, when it was back the ruling party had won the election...
So beware of centralized electronic systems, that just makes much easier the task of somebody trying to tamper the results (high risk of single point of failure I would say).
So:
1.- Would we be able to read/write files in lets say a ZIP drive, take the disk, and read it in another drive?
2.- Would we be able to read or modify a file created in a different machine?
I don't care about the OS or the applications, I will use wathever is best, but I do care about my data, how much these proposals could restrict the control of my own data?
That is the point! There are problems you want to solve, but they are unsolvable beforehand.
Some of them you can not probe that are unsolvable, so basicaly you could be wasting your time trying to solve it in the first place.
I just read a novel about this, very good and even easy. Godel and Turing (I think, it does not matter now) showed that.
And there are some problems that are unsolvable and can't be proved to be unsolvable.... Godel mixed with Turing me thinks ....
Well, of course the reverse is the opposite! ;-)
One thing does not exclude the other: bad science gets far too much credit thanks to the media (crystals, horoscops, pyramid's powers, alien abduction, etc.) and good science can be cornered by sckeptic scientists. But the results are far different: bad science accepted at face value is useles at least, harmful at worst.
Real science in the other hand has to be rigurously proved before it is accepted as truth. Einstein had to write down E=m*c*c (with all the analysis) before making ludicrous claims!