You REALLY have not tried Eclipse. Eclipse allows you to edit Ant scripts the same way that your vi or Ed does. But it also gives you nice stuff like name completion (hit Ctrl-Space and get a dropdown with all tags available in the current context) it verifies the syntax of your Ant script on the fly and it can execute your Ant script much the same way you do it in your bash window. Hell, you can even replace the original Java Builder of Eclipse with your customized Ant based build. Eclipse and Ant is a very, very powerful combo. Learn the tools you try to criticize before you retreat to your old ways!
Anyone else remember when Stallman acted like a kid wrt KDE and like a cheerleader when it came to GNOME? And then Miguel started to develop quite non-Free code at Ximian and later sold the company to the decidedly-non-Free Novell. That make Stallman look like a real ass who backed the wrong horse.
Shame on you Stallman for picking sides and then getting fucked in the ass by those you put so much of your fundamentalist faith in.
Man, as much as I hate to point this out (knowing how much this irritates IDEA people) all the features you mention are present in Eclipse. Most have been there since Eclipse 2.0.
Auto Import - works like a champ in Eclipse. It is a huge timesaver and I just can't get myself to using an IDE that can't do it.
Auto Method Creation - Also present in Eclipse. Just right click the error icon when it appears and pick Quick Fix and then select "create new method"
Java Doc help can be had in eclipse in a variety of ways... selecting a method/field/class name, mouse hovering, F2, Shift-F2 there is many other ways I'm sure...
Eclipse refactoring is every bit as complete as IDEA's. There are also things such as "externalize constants" that I wasn't able to find in IDEA.
You should try Eclipse. IDEA is very nice but I find Eclipse even better.
To each his own I suppose. I did not pay premium for my LCD to blur it with ClearType now. I much prefer the jagged but sharp text on an undistorted LCD than the ClearType moire. I think people have to try it out as I believe it may not be to everyone's taste. Peace.
During cell division your DNA is copied but not always exactly. Mutations can (and do) occur and most mutations are benign in nature. There is also a limit on the number of divisions a cell can perform. If you cancel that limit you increase the number of times a cell can divide and consequently the amount of mutation the dna will undergo. This increases the likelyhood of the mutations turning malignant. Anyone claiming otherwise is engaging in a lot of wishful thinking and self-delusion.
Nothing. They have no answer that's why the 7 page article avoids talking about the deadliest of diseases. As far as I'm aware the mice which had their life extended artificially by gene modifications ended up being much more susceptible to cancers. The end result is that we would indeed have a chance to live longer but at the significant risk of developing all kinds of nasty cancers. Which is hardly a tradeoff most of us would be willing to make. At present one in three people will have have developed cancer at some point in their lives. If you increase the odds even more I'm not really sure what you're gaining. Seems like a brainfart of an idea to me with this life extending crap. Give us our 80 years by providing the cure for cancer first I say, and worry about immortality once we have cancer out of our minds.
I don't really know, not being a Java guru, but how good are the Java de-compilers if any?
Actually, near perfect. The java decompilers can even work on the fly. There used to be an Eclipse plugin that would decompile.class files on the fly and show you the code in a normal eclipse editor window. It worked flawlessly every time I tried. Of course variable names were generated and comments were not there but other than that it was 100% successful and the resulting code was very readable.
In most of Europe BMW is the gangstah's car. If you drive a beemer you're immediately assumed to be pushing drugs or running a brothel. Last car I'd buy for "image".
Anyone else who got burned by using anything from that company? Rational Rose was a disaster and the quickest path to failure for any reasonable sized sofware project that I've seen. I don't even understand how it is supposed to help you manage complexity. It's all about silly pictures that have no compiler validation (except for class diagrams which aren't that complex to handle without Rose) and often over time become work of pure fiction.
Even good old Purify was butchered once Rational acuiqred the company. They immediately added their "enterprise" features making Purify slow and buggy in a course of a single release.
Rational is a company that threw software engineering back a decade by pimping their useless wares on unsuspecting IT managers and hapless devlopers.
Any media that presented any opposing views about the war in Iraq is accused of having a "left bias". US media is skewed so much to the right wing that common sense appears to be a "leftist bias".
I used to work for the - now defunct - iMagicTV. The truth is that the bandwidth over phone lines is still very limited. At the time we used 4MB/sec Mpeg2 which gives good quality but an average DSL link can support 6MB/sec at best meaning you can only have one TV receiver without a noticable drop in quality. MPEG 4 offers compression rates that make 2 TVs more realistic but realtime MPEG4 encoders are still not quite there.
Also breaking into the entertainment industry is unbelieveably hard without having a solid DRM solution... as much as most slashdot crowd may despise DRM the truth is that it's necessary if you want to convince Warner Bros execs to let you broadcast their crap.
Ditto for Canada. Here it leads to even more social snafus because it is hard to tell an American from a Canadian. This makes Americans think that Canadians must be "just like them" and that their political views must be similar too. Nothing could be further from the truth. Canadians love to hate Dubya with extreme passion and I don't think I ever encoutered a Canadian (outside rural Alberta) who was behind recent US policy. It is bet for Americans not to get involved in any political conversations at this particular time.
Yeah but you're talking about 55 miles per British gallon as opposed to 60 miles per American gallon. Big difference
Rice nominated. US now officially extremist
on
Colin Powell Resigns
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
What Lessons are there to Learn from the Outcome of the 2004 US Election?
The post election commentary in the US is divided between questioning the accuracy of the count of votes, or wondering whether the Democratic Party had to pay more attention to discussing "moral" values as part of its election activity. Outside the US, there is discussion about whether there is some social flaw in the American character that has led them to 4 more years of a George Bush Presidency.
While these considerations may provide a way to review what happened in the recent US election, they fail to raise questions that take a broader view. For example, such questions could include:
What is the nature of the two party system in the US?
How much leverage does this system give to the American people to determine who will be their political officials?
Is there some systemic problem responsible for the unbridled abuse of power both at home and abroad by the American government?
What is the nature of the so called American "democracy"? Are there any means for those Americans opposed to the continued occupation of Iraq to affect the actions of their government?
If the elections don't provide a means to have the desired effect, what will it require to create the conditions where the people have some say over the actions of their government?
Traditionally, it is not that one can affect change in a situation unless one also tries to understand the nature of the problem. In the 2004 election, many people committed themselves to trying to replace George Bush. The call was to vote for "anyone but Bush".
Early on the Democratic Party narrowed its sights to John Kerry as the candidate. From there on, the "anyone but Bush" meant a vote for Kerry, arguing that he could realistically defeat Bush. The Democratic Party challenged the effort of Ralph Nader to provide an alternative, removing him from the ballot in whatever states possible. The Green Party decided not to campaign vigorously anywhere that the campaign might pose a threat to the election of Kerry. Several activists who had backed Nader in the 2000 election urged voters to vote for Kerry rather than Nader this time. Despite these efforts, Bush now has a second term in the White House.
One party, with two wings...
One of the problems with the 2004 election strategy of those hoping to defeat Bush, is that there was a mistaken understanding of what it means to be "realistic" in the kind of "two-party" system in the US. In a country like Germany, for example, a vote for a smaller party, like the Greens, made it possible for the Social Democratic Party to win re-election in 2002. In the US, however, such a vote, as with the Nader vote in 2000, could not be combined with the Gore vote, to give the Democratic Party the White House.
What this means, one is told, is that in the US, the votes for a candidate who is not from one of the two major political parties, are wasted votes. Thus, in the 2004 election, there was a determination to encourage a vote for the Democratic Party candidate, regardless of his position on important issues, such as the war in Iraq.
The Democratic Party in the US has a long history of deciding that it will pursue the vote of those who might otherwise vote Republican. With no external left opposition, the Democratic Party accepts the issues as the Republican Party presents them, but proposes it can implement the Republican agenda better than the Republicans will. Though this is not necessarily true on every issue, on the fundamental issues of foreign policy, and of domestic policy issues to support that foreign policy, the two parties form one party, with two wings. Essentially, in the US, on these important issues, both the Democratic or Republican Parties, will implement the same foreign policy. (For example, Clinton carried out the sanctions against Iraq and enforced the No Fly Zones. Bush then argued that his policy of invading Iraq was just a continuation o
Mentioning Taiwan as a source of cheap labour makes it sound like you know very little about this particular subject and you are simply making stuff up.
Remember if you are tv/radio/news station broadcasting live election results over the internet make sure you have plenty of bandwidth to spare tomorrow and that your server can withstand the onslaught. It's not just US but 90% of the world that's going to tune in tomorrow for the Grand Finale.
Are you really so naive with the Iraq war? This Fox thing really gets to people's heads.
Iraq was a neoconservative project conceived and implemented by the PNAC members. They wanted to create a free market utopia in the Middle East.
They did the exact reverse of PolPot's revolution. "Everything's For Sale" was the post-war motto and the only economic model for Iraq.
Too fucking bad that it blew up in their faces. Primarily because just like PolPot's "vision" for Cambodia, Free Market Iraq was pure utopia completely disjoint from the reality of the world in general and the situation in Iraq in particular.
The US failed miserably at everything in post war Iraq. From rebuilding the basic facilities to establishing a sane socio-economic system that would allow the country to pick itself off the floor.
Bush failed at everything he tried. The neocons bankrupted America, failed to destroy Al-Qaeda and destabilized the Middle East by invading Iraq. Intentionally or not they are the worst thing that could have happened to the world after 9/11. Bush has got to go.
Ahnold represents all that is wrong with American politics. It is becoming entertainment or a "reality TV" instead of a real discussion and thoughtful decision making. He is the symbol of modern day American media that can be described in one sentence: "All sizzle and no meat".
Well George had his four years and most people did not like what they saw (war mongering, dogma based policy bordering on theocracy, junk science, militarization, shady deals for office friends (Halliburton first and foremost), terrible environmental record, tax breaks for SUV owners, massive deficit and the list goes on.
Sure enough, Kerry is pretty much the unknown in this equation, but honest to goodness could his record be any WORSE than Dubya's? Is the status quo really WORTH preserving here?
This would make sense for someone from outside looking in (ie. me). But I think the true masters of spin in this election is the Bush camp. Maybe the only impact this video is goint to have is to reinforce electorate's decisions and will make no difference to the undecideds.
Slashdot Mirror
You REALLY have not tried Eclipse. Eclipse allows you to edit Ant scripts the same way that your vi or Ed does. But it also gives you nice stuff like name completion (hit Ctrl-Space and get a dropdown with all tags available in the current context) it verifies the syntax of your Ant script on the fly and it can execute your Ant script much the same way you do it in your bash window. Hell, you can even replace the original Java Builder of Eclipse with your customized Ant based build. Eclipse and Ant is a very, very powerful combo. Learn the tools you try to criticize before you retreat to your old ways!
You're right... no alternative. None whatsoever. Maybe one form some three lettered fly-by-night shaky little software services company.
Shame on you Stallman for picking sides and then getting fucked in the ass by those you put so much of your fundamentalist faith in.
Auto Import - works like a champ in Eclipse. It is a huge timesaver and I just can't get myself to using an IDE that can't do it.
Auto Method Creation - Also present in Eclipse. Just right click the error icon when it appears and pick Quick Fix and then select "create new method"
Java Doc help can be had in eclipse in a variety of ways... selecting a method/field/class name, mouse hovering, F2, Shift-F2 there is many other ways I'm sure...
Eclipse refactoring is every bit as complete as IDEA's. There are also things such as "externalize constants" that I wasn't able to find in IDEA.
You should try Eclipse. IDEA is very nice but I find Eclipse even better.
Insanely bad idea. Now that you blackmailed them into a raise you'll be let go as soon as a suitable replacement is found. Mark my words.
To each his own I suppose. I did not pay premium for my LCD to blur it with ClearType now. I much prefer the jagged but sharp text on an undistorted LCD than the ClearType moire. I think people have to try it out as I believe it may not be to everyone's taste. Peace.
During cell division your DNA is copied but not always exactly. Mutations can (and do) occur and most mutations are benign in nature. There is also a limit on the number of divisions a cell can perform. If you cancel that limit you increase the number of times a cell can divide and consequently the amount of mutation the dna will undergo. This increases the likelyhood of the mutations turning malignant. Anyone claiming otherwise is engaging in a lot of wishful thinking and self-delusion.
The link you supplied makes no mention of that. Care to point the exact URL with a quote?
Nothing. They have no answer that's why the 7 page article avoids talking about the deadliest of diseases. As far as I'm aware the mice which had their life extended artificially by gene modifications ended up being much more susceptible to cancers. The end result is that we would indeed have a chance to live longer but at the significant risk of developing all kinds of nasty cancers. Which is hardly a tradeoff most of us would be willing to make. At present one in three people will have have developed cancer at some point in their lives. If you increase the odds even more I'm not really sure what you're gaining. Seems like a brainfart of an idea to me with this life extending crap. Give us our 80 years by providing the cure for cancer first I say, and worry about immortality once we have cancer out of our minds.
Actually, near perfect. The java decompilers can even work on the fly. There used to be an Eclipse plugin that would decompile .class files on the fly and show you the code in a normal eclipse editor window. It worked flawlessly every time I tried. Of course variable names were generated and comments were not there but other than that it was 100% successful and the resulting code was very readable.
In most of Europe BMW is the gangstah's car. If you drive a beemer you're immediately assumed to be pushing drugs or running a brothel. Last car I'd buy for "image".
Never realized that Scott Meyers makes his living in the adult industry now.
Even good old Purify was butchered once Rational acuiqred the company. They immediately added their "enterprise" features making Purify slow and buggy in a course of a single release.
Rational is a company that threw software engineering back a decade by pimping their useless wares on unsuspecting IT managers and hapless devlopers.
Rational, just roll over and die! Pretty please!
Any media that presented any opposing views about the war in Iraq is accused of having a "left bias". US media is skewed so much to the right wing that common sense appears to be a "leftist bias".
Also breaking into the entertainment industry is unbelieveably hard without having a solid DRM solution... as much as most slashdot crowd may despise DRM the truth is that it's necessary if you want to convince Warner Bros execs to let you broadcast their crap.
Ditto for Canada. Here it leads to even more social snafus because it is hard to tell an American from a Canadian. This makes Americans think that Canadians must be "just like them" and that their political views must be similar too. Nothing could be further from the truth. Canadians love to hate Dubya with extreme passion and I don't think I ever encoutered a Canadian (outside rural Alberta) who was behind recent US policy. It is bet for Americans not to get involved in any political conversations at this particular time.
Yeah but you're talking about 55 miles per British gallon as opposed to 60 miles per American gallon. Big difference
The post election commentary in the US is divided between questioning the accuracy of the count of votes, or wondering whether the Democratic Party had to pay more attention to discussing "moral" values as part of its election activity. Outside the US, there is discussion about whether there is some social flaw in the American character that has led them to 4 more years of a George Bush Presidency.
While these considerations may provide a way to review what happened in the recent US election, they fail to raise questions that take a broader view. For example, such questions could include:
Traditionally, it is not that one can affect change in a situation unless one also tries to understand the nature of the problem. In the 2004 election, many people committed themselves to trying to replace George Bush. The call was to vote for "anyone but Bush".
Early on the Democratic Party narrowed its sights to John Kerry as the candidate. From there on, the "anyone but Bush" meant a vote for Kerry, arguing that he could realistically defeat Bush. The Democratic Party challenged the effort of Ralph Nader to provide an alternative, removing him from the ballot in whatever states possible. The Green Party decided not to campaign vigorously anywhere that the campaign might pose a threat to the election of Kerry. Several activists who had backed Nader in the 2000 election urged voters to vote for Kerry rather than Nader this time. Despite these efforts, Bush now has a second term in the White House.
One party, with two wings...
One of the problems with the 2004 election strategy of those hoping to defeat Bush, is that there was a mistaken understanding of what it means to be "realistic" in the kind of "two-party" system in the US. In a country like Germany, for example, a vote for a smaller party, like the Greens, made it possible for the Social Democratic Party to win re-election in 2002. In the US, however, such a vote, as with the Nader vote in 2000, could not be combined with the Gore vote, to give the Democratic Party the White House.
What this means, one is told, is that in the US, the votes for a candidate who is not from one of the two major political parties, are wasted votes. Thus, in the 2004 election, there was a determination to encourage a vote for the Democratic Party candidate, regardless of his position on important issues, such as the war in Iraq.
The Democratic Party in the US has a long history of deciding that it will pursue the vote of those who might otherwise vote Republican. With no external left opposition, the Democratic Party accepts the issues as the Republican Party presents them, but proposes it can implement the Republican agenda better than the Republicans will. Though this is not necessarily true on every issue, on the fundamental issues of foreign policy, and of domestic policy issues to support that foreign policy, the two parties form one party, with two wings. Essentially, in the US, on these important issues, both the Democratic or Republican Parties, will implement the same foreign policy. (For example, Clinton carried out the sanctions against Iraq and enforced the No Fly Zones. Bush then argued that his policy of invading Iraq was just a continuation o
Mentioning Taiwan as a source of cheap labour makes it sound like you know very little about this particular subject and you are simply making stuff up.
Remember if you are tv/radio/news station broadcasting live election results over the internet make sure you have plenty of bandwidth to spare tomorrow and that your server can withstand the onslaught. It's not just US but 90% of the world that's going to tune in tomorrow for the Grand Finale.
Iraq was a neoconservative project conceived and implemented by the PNAC members. They wanted to create a free market utopia in the Middle East.
They did the exact reverse of PolPot's revolution. "Everything's For Sale" was the post-war motto and the only economic model for Iraq.
Too fucking bad that it blew up in their faces. Primarily because just like PolPot's "vision" for Cambodia, Free Market Iraq was pure utopia completely disjoint from the reality of the world in general and the situation in Iraq in particular.
The US failed miserably at everything in post war Iraq. From rebuilding the basic facilities to establishing a sane socio-economic system that would allow the country to pick itself off the floor.
Bush failed at everything he tried. The neocons bankrupted America, failed to destroy Al-Qaeda and destabilized the Middle East by invading Iraq. Intentionally or not they are the worst thing that could have happened to the world after 9/11. Bush has got to go.
Ahnold represents all that is wrong with American politics. It is becoming entertainment or a "reality TV" instead of a real discussion and thoughtful decision making. He is the symbol of modern day American media that can be described in one sentence: "All sizzle and no meat".
Sure enough, Kerry is pretty much the unknown in this equation, but honest to goodness could his record be any WORSE than Dubya's? Is the status quo really WORTH preserving here?
This would make sense for someone from outside looking in (ie. me). But I think the true masters of spin in this election is the Bush camp. Maybe the only impact this video is goint to have is to reinforce electorate's decisions and will make no difference to the undecideds.