In case anyone is interested, there is a little known language that is simpler than BASIC and yet allows one to write complex applications or just simple scripts. It can be interpreted or compiled to Java byte code and perhaps to native machine code although I have not yet found any compelling reason to do so. It can be used to write procedural code or OO code. (Sorry - no "GOTO" statements.) "Hello World" is about as simple as you can get:
say "Hello World"
But you can write a functional web browser in a single line not much more complex than that.
There is even a simple IDE available that allows you to write some code in a window and click a start button to interpret the program and see the output in a window.
I personally use this language to write Android applications for the Dalvik VM.
I say "little known" because no one has mentioned it here. The language is called NetRexx and IBM is currently in the process of releasing it as open source code so the language community can maintain and enhance it as needed. I don't think there is a simpler way to learn programming with a language that can produce practical applications at this time. Info: http://kermitkiser.com/NetRexx
Sorry, missed your question earlier. I program in a language called NetRexx which is then translated into Java and compiled into Dalvik byte code via an "IDE" that I wrote (in NetRexx of course:-)
Seems to be some confusion around here. There is a difference between the developers of Android (the OS) and the developers of Android applications.
Even if there are proven to be patent problems with the Dalvik VM, an application developer is not distributing any part of the OS, only byte code which may or may not have been generated by a Java compiler and just happens to run in a Dalvik VM.
Speaking as an Android app developer, I don't even program in Java. (And no, not the App Inventor or NDK either.)
Ditto. I also live in Washington. We already have one of the highest sales taxes in the country - almost 10% in some areas already.
While Washingtonians may deserve the politicians they elect, we are not totally stupid. I could care less about how this affected Ballmer and a few other people. It was very clear that this was a tricky way to slip an income tax on top of the sales tax and that it would hit everyone before long. The politicians have tried this several times as they desperately want to control more of the citizens money. For our own good of course.;-)
The problem with "progressive" taxes is that the government only has to inflate our currency to increase our tax rates. No nasty unpopular voting needed...
I call BS on this post. I know from personal experience that no one gets even a private pilots license without demonstrating multiple times that he can perform the proper response to a stall. I have done it successfully and unsuccessfully (with an instructor along to catch mistakes) and the issue is whether or not you can override the natural instinct in a panic situation where everything inside you is screaming "pull up" or similar completely wrong messages.
On the other hand, I have also had an air traffic controller clear me for solo takeoff on a runway that he had seconds before cleared another pilot to land on from the other direction. This is an obvious error to any pilot when your runway number plus (or minus) 18 equals the other pilots runway number but as an inexperienced pilot I assumed that I had heard something wrong. Fortunately, the other pilot was an experienced CFI and corrected ATC on the problem before it could become life threatening.
I call FUD. If this is actually made practical and not always just around the corner like flying cars and fusion power, it will take about two weeks to develop counter-measures. It only took me about a minute to come up with one surefire method to defeat it.
What are "maths"? Is that like mathematics? I must speak a different version of English than you do.I would however not call it "American" since that would be demeaning to the French of Quebec or the Spanish of Mexico. Perhaps "American English" is specific enough. Or is there an American English other than that of the USA?
I see no mention of nutrition in these comments. Everyone seems focused on quantity of food while mostly ignoring the issue of quality. The decline in nutritional quality of food produced by current agricultural methods may be a significant factor in the widespread malnutrition and obesity in our supposedly affluent cultures. Of course, the major factor is consumption of "refined", "processed", and "junk" foods that have little nutritional value for their caloric content. You can find some related reports here:
http://www.organic-center.org/science.nutri.php?ac tion=view&report_id=41
and
http://www.soilandhealth.org/06clipfile/Nutritiona l%20Quality%20of%20Organically-Grown%20Food.html
You guys seem very naive. Corporations do not have morals - they only care about $$$$$$money and lawsuits. The people that run them are even less likely to have morals than politicians (aka lawyers). In fact the legal system demands ("due diligence") that they do everything legally (moral or immoral) possible to maximize profit and crush any opposition.
eBay has tried several times to shut down Half.com even though they do not have any other venue for selling rare/low turnover items profitably. They only bought it to close down what they viewed as undue competition. They don't care what impact that has on the rest of the world. Look at how they are slowly removing features (like pre-orders) and trickling catalog updates. The goal has not changed.
Maybe the Democrats should declare Kerry their "legitimate" President - Oh wait, Mexico beat them to that idea.
Guess the Republicans in Washington State missed that boat too...
Hmmm... Should I care that the courts are deciding who wins elections for democracies now rather than 50.1% of the people dictating to 49.9% of the people? The only race that made sense to me in the last election was the one decided by flipping a coin.
Am I the only one who feels that anyone who wants to run other people's lives because they "know what is best for everyone" (ie a politician) should automatically be disqualified from holding a public office?
Disclaimer: IANA(biologist, evolutionist, creationist, panspermiaist or any other ist you can dream up).
I always wondered why the main evidence I was given in my university biology class to support evolution was that "all reasonable scientists accept evolution". It didn't occur to me until much later that scientists meant biologists and that you can only become one by at least pretending to accept evolution as a fact.
The comments I read here seem to imply that allowing students to know that some people don't accept evolution as fact will destroy their ability to think independently and possibly threaten the "Theory of Evolution" itself (whatever that is - maybe neo-Darwinian punctuated equilibrium?). If that is true, then maybe the only significant evidence supporting evolution really is the "everybody reasonable accepts this" argument.
Also such open minded people better attack Scientific American quickly for their panspermia article in the latest issue since no one should know that there are alternate viewpoints on the origin of life. And be sure to ban any materials by "mathematicians" like Sir Fred Hoyle (an evolutionist and panspermia supporter) or Roger Penrose because their mathematical analysis might threaten neo-Darwinian beliefs.
Where do I stand you ask? Just in case anyone really was interested - I think standard creationist or ID views are simpleminded drivel but no more so than Darwinian evolution, natural selection, hopeful monsters, panspermia, or alien invasions. No theory I have heard of comes close to explaining the fossil records or the mathematics of life propagation. I will keep looking and everyone can believe whatever they want.
I read the whole opinion piece and while it makes some good points, I think it misses just as many. For example even though the plots and sci-fi setting were great, the acting and "chemistry" of the actors was just as good and important in making this series the greatest ever shown. The cast probably could have made it good even as an old time western without the sci-fi element. (Granted, I much prefer the variety of ideas that a sci-fi setting allows.)
Even though there was some "political incorrectness" in the series, I doubt that is what really killed it. More likely it challenged the cultural world view that most Americans think they have, only one part of which is the worship of the "rule of law" (ignoring the fact that it is no better than the values of those who interpret and enforce it). Even so, Firefly never really crossed the sacred cultural lines such as "monogomy is the only righteous lifestyle" which even Hollywood supports religiously.
My opinions and a dollar will get you a $.98 cup of coffee.
Present day computers are extremely primitive. I recommend Sci-Fi for those lacking imagination. Even "Star Trek" will show you some things we are not close to yet like "real-time universal translators". Try the book "Snow Crash" or better yet "Diamond Age" for a glimpse of the possibilities of future technologies when there is a decent amount of computer power available. Here is a personal projection (non-copyrighted but in the process of being written into a novel):
The year is 3002AD. Babies are born the same old way but they come with a "nano-nanny AI" injected into their system in the uterus by the mother's imbedded nanite symbiote. The "nanoAI" systems contain copies of any media ever produced in recorded history. They interface fully with the human nervous system for input and output and automatically record everything the carrying human senses throughout his/her entire life for playback on demand. They are a distributed parallel self-replicating computing system capable of retaining the complete lifetime experience of the host unless the body is completely destroyed. The concept of a "computer" as an external device has largely been forgotten because each person's internal AI can interface with and remotely control any nearby "technology" using power extracted from the human metabolism. The human imbedded AI systems can interface with each other in several ways with various bandwidths even allowing sharing of full sensory inputs.
That is just a small taste of an admittedly far off future, but it provides a tiny glimpse of the possibilities of truly advanced computing power in small packages.
I may not have much formal Economics training, but I'm not dumb. I just did a field check on CD prices at a department store. The single CD prices in the "classical music" section ranged from $3 to $5. The CD prices in the "popular music" sections ranged from $15-$18. Ask yourself if the composers, performers, producers, manufacturers, distributers, retailers, etc. are making a profit on the lower priced CDs or if they are just losing money on them to benefit you.
Face it, the issue here is the same as the other "IP" battles like "obvious patents". If a controling monopoly is granted to someone, they will expolit it to the hilt to make windfall profits at the expense of anyone they can. Those profits do not go to the actual creator of the IP in most of the cases either. The musicians have little choice but to sign away the copyrights if they want distribution.
Depends. If the computer contains an improperly modified MR FUSION PC Card, ISA version, simply accessing the BIOS setup may be enough to inadvertantly trigger WW III...
Fascinating discussions on Life - Wish I had time to read all the comments in detail.
My intellect and knowledge are not better than most here so I will keep my comments to myself. However, I am occasionally granted an interview with The Creator(tm) who has graciously allowed me to post my translations of his responses to my questions about these matters. Please forgive any errors in my feeble attempts to compose His communications into limited human language concepts! His thoughts/expressions/? were roughly as follows:
1) He has deliberately initiated these discussions at this time for His purposes and will initiate many more soon.
2) He is vastly amused at the arrogance of those who think they can replace Him with the childish games they call "religion", "science", "government", etc...
3) A man instantly transported from a primitive society to an advanced society to observe a functioning television set could easily conclude that the contraption of glass, plastic, and metal was somehow "alive". Primitives cannot readily distinguish between carrier/medium and content/message. The day will come when you can see beyond the primitive biological constructs which limit you for now...
4) Creating "life" is a relatively simple followup technique once you have figured out how to construct a "space-time-energy" continuum which allows "event sequences" to generate a "quantum wavefront framework" which can be "limitedly influenced" by "life-forces" to collapse into new event sequences. You are begining to see that each "particle/wave" is recreated billions of times per second continuously, but you have a ways to go to begin to really understand the creation called "free will", etc...
5) His response to identity queries remains the same as given Moses (at a certain "burning bush" meeting) - "I exist because I exist". No one else can make this statement because everything else has an external cause/source... Human reason will never approach this simple power!
6) Humanity killed it's replacement ("Homo Superior" aka "son of man") ~2000 years ago, but could not even make that stick because it has no real understanding of "life"...
7) His plans are not threatened by anything "mankind" could think, say, or do. Our plans generally remain foolishly centered on our own meagre clinging to "life" unless He intervenes!
Seriously, the days of the mouse device are numbered. I deduce this from the fact that the only mouse I have seen used in Star Trek was the one Scotty tried to talk to in one of the movies.
Are there any better interface techniques on the horizon? Perhaps using this technology with one of those little cameras on top of the monitor to track eyeball position and shift focus to whatever you are looking at, for example? Along with two stage select buttons like some cameras give you with the good/bad warning on light touch and shutter release on heavy touch? (Light touch displays pointer, heavy touch gives "mouse click"...)
Slashdot Mirror
Suspicion: The audiences that would find the app objectionable are the US government leaders.
In case anyone is interested, there is a little known language that is simpler than BASIC and yet allows one to write complex applications or just simple scripts. It can be interpreted or compiled to Java byte code and perhaps to native machine code although I have not yet found any compelling reason to do so. It can be used to write procedural code or OO code. (Sorry - no "GOTO" statements.) "Hello World" is about as simple as you can get:
say "Hello World"
But you can write a functional web browser in a single line not much more complex than that.
There is even a simple IDE available that allows you to write some code in a window and click a start button to interpret the program and see the output in a window.
I personally use this language to write Android applications for the Dalvik VM.
I say "little known" because no one has mentioned it here. The language is called NetRexx and IBM is currently in the process of releasing it as open source code so the language community can maintain and enhance it as needed. I don't think there is a simpler way to learn programming with a language that can produce practical applications at this time. Info: http://kermitkiser.com/NetRexx
Sorry, missed your question earlier. I program in a language called NetRexx which is then translated into Java and compiled into Dalvik byte code via an "IDE" that I wrote (in NetRexx of course :-)
Seems to be some confusion around here. There is a difference between the developers of Android (the OS) and the developers of Android applications.
Even if there are proven to be patent problems with the Dalvik VM, an application developer is not distributing any part of the OS, only byte code which may or may not have been generated by a Java compiler and just happens to run in a Dalvik VM.
Speaking as an Android app developer, I don't even program in Java. (And no, not the App Inventor or NDK either.)
Ditto. I also live in Washington. We already have one of the highest sales taxes in the country - almost 10% in some areas already.
While Washingtonians may deserve the politicians they elect, we are not totally stupid. I could care less about how this affected Ballmer and a few other people. It was very clear that this was a tricky way to slip an income tax on top of the sales tax and that it would hit everyone before long. The politicians have tried this several times as they desperately want to control more of the citizens money. For our own good of course. ;-)
The problem with "progressive" taxes is that the government only has to inflate our currency to increase our tax rates. No nasty unpopular voting needed...
I call BS on this post. I know from personal experience that no one gets even a private pilots license without demonstrating multiple times that he can perform the proper response to a stall. I have done it successfully and unsuccessfully (with an instructor along to catch mistakes) and the issue is whether or not you can override the natural instinct in a panic situation where everything inside you is screaming "pull up" or similar completely wrong messages.
On the other hand, I have also had an air traffic controller clear me for solo takeoff on a runway that he had seconds before cleared another pilot to land on from the other direction. This is an obvious error to any pilot when your runway number plus (or minus) 18 equals the other pilots runway number but as an inexperienced pilot I assumed that I had heard something wrong. Fortunately, the other pilot was an experienced CFI and corrected ATC on the problem before it could become life threatening.
Some things are experience. Some things are guts.
When you have a strong monopoly, you can squeeze the cash cow even in tough times.
I call FUD. If this is actually made practical and not always just around the corner like flying cars and fusion power, it will take about two weeks to develop counter-measures. It only took me about a minute to come up with one surefire method to defeat it.
What are "maths"? Is that like mathematics? I must speak a different version of English than you do.I would however not call it "American" since that would be demeaning to the French of Quebec or the Spanish of Mexico. Perhaps "American English" is specific enough. Or is there an American English other than that of the USA?
What will they think of next?
I see no mention of nutrition in these comments. Everyone seems focused on quantity of food while mostly ignoring the issue of quality. The decline in nutritional quality of food produced by current agricultural methods may be a significant factor in the widespread malnutrition and obesity in our supposedly affluent cultures. Of course, the major factor is consumption of "refined", "processed", and "junk" foods that have little nutritional value for their caloric content. You can find some related reports here: http://www.organic-center.org/science.nutri.php?ac tion=view&report_id=41
and
http://www.soilandhealth.org/06clipfile/Nutritiona l%20Quality%20of%20Organically-Grown%20Food.html
Hmmm.... Exactly how long have you had this stifling technology condition? Long enough to affect some "evolutionary" process?
Sorry. I didn't mean to interfere with anyone's worship of the mysterious god of natural selection...
Not to be nitpicky (well maybe but this is Slashdot after all) but I think you guys are discussing "precision" not "accuracy"...
o n
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accuracy_and_precisi
You need to toss in two virgins to cover the financial loss. Anybody know the going rate to attend a "virgin mud wrestling" event?
You guys seem very naive. Corporations do not have morals - they only care about $$$$$$money and lawsuits. The people that run them are even less likely to have morals than politicians (aka lawyers). In fact the legal system demands ("due diligence") that they do everything legally (moral or immoral) possible to maximize profit and crush any opposition.
eBay has tried several times to shut down Half.com even though they do not have any other venue for selling rare/low turnover items profitably. They only bought it to close down what they viewed as undue competition. They don't care what impact that has on the rest of the world. Look at how they are slowly removing features (like pre-orders) and trickling catalog updates. The goal has not changed.
Maybe the Democrats should declare Kerry their "legitimate" President - Oh wait, Mexico beat them to that idea.
Guess the Republicans in Washington State missed that boat too...
Hmmm... Should I care that the courts are deciding who wins elections for democracies now rather than 50.1% of the people dictating to 49.9% of the people? The only race that made sense to me in the last election was the one decided by flipping a coin.
Am I the only one who feels that anyone who wants to run other people's lives because they "know what is best for everyone" (ie a politician) should automatically be disqualified from holding a public office?
- Another voter from Washington State
Disclaimer: IANA(biologist, evolutionist, creationist, panspermiaist or any other ist you can dream up).
I always wondered why the main evidence I was given in my university biology class to support evolution was that "all reasonable scientists accept evolution". It didn't occur to me until much later that scientists meant biologists and that you can only become one by at least pretending to accept evolution as a fact.
The comments I read here seem to imply that allowing students to know that some people don't accept evolution as fact will destroy their ability to think independently and possibly threaten the "Theory of Evolution" itself (whatever that is - maybe neo-Darwinian punctuated equilibrium?). If that is true, then maybe the only significant evidence supporting evolution really is the "everybody reasonable accepts this" argument.
Also such open minded people better attack Scientific American quickly for their panspermia article in the latest issue since no one should know that there are alternate viewpoints on the origin of life. And be sure to ban any materials by "mathematicians" like Sir Fred Hoyle (an evolutionist and panspermia supporter) or Roger Penrose because their mathematical analysis might threaten neo-Darwinian beliefs.
Where do I stand you ask? Just in case anyone really was interested - I think standard creationist or ID views are simpleminded drivel but no more so than Darwinian evolution, natural selection, hopeful monsters, panspermia, or alien invasions. No theory I have heard of comes close to explaining the fossil records or the mathematics of life propagation. I will keep looking and everyone can believe whatever they want.
Hmmm... Let me think...
Choose A or B?
A: Drug companies decide who lives or dies based on how much profit they can get out of it.
B: Governments decide who lives or dies based on the "politically correct" diseases.
I think I'll choose C and I don't mean the current combo of A and B that appears to prevail.
I read the whole opinion piece and while it makes some good points, I think it misses just as many. For example even though the plots and sci-fi setting were great, the acting and "chemistry" of the actors was just as good and important in making this series the greatest ever shown. The cast probably could have made it good even as an old time western without the sci-fi element. (Granted, I much prefer the variety of ideas that a sci-fi setting allows.)
Even though there was some "political incorrectness" in the series, I doubt that is what really killed it. More likely it challenged the cultural world view that most Americans think they have, only one part of which is the worship of the "rule of law" (ignoring the fact that it is no better than the values of those who interpret and enforce it). Even so, Firefly never really crossed the sacred cultural lines such as "monogomy is the only righteous lifestyle" which even Hollywood supports religiously.
My opinions and a dollar will get you a $.98 cup of coffee.
Present day computers are extremely primitive.
I recommend Sci-Fi for those lacking imagination.
Even "Star Trek" will show you some things we are not close to yet like "real-time universal translators". Try the book "Snow Crash" or better yet "Diamond Age" for a glimpse of the possibilities of future technologies when there is a decent amount of computer power available. Here is a personal projection (non-copyrighted but in the process of being written into a novel):
The year is 3002AD. Babies are born the same old way but they come with a "nano-nanny AI" injected into their system in the uterus by the mother's imbedded nanite symbiote. The "nanoAI" systems contain copies of any media ever produced in recorded history. They interface fully with the human nervous system for input and output and automatically record everything the carrying human senses throughout his/her entire life for playback on demand. They are a distributed parallel self-replicating computing system capable of retaining the complete lifetime experience of the host unless the body is completely destroyed. The concept of a "computer" as an external device has largely been forgotten because each person's internal AI can interface with and remotely control any nearby "technology" using power extracted from the human metabolism. The human imbedded AI systems can interface with each other in several ways with various bandwidths even allowing sharing of full sensory inputs.
That is just a small taste of an admittedly far off future, but it provides a tiny glimpse of the possibilities of truly advanced computing power in small packages.
I may not have much formal Economics training, but I'm not dumb. I just did a field check on CD prices at a department store. The single CD prices in the "classical music" section ranged from $3 to $5. The CD prices in the "popular music" sections ranged from $15-$18. Ask yourself if the composers, performers, producers, manufacturers, distributers, retailers, etc. are making a profit on the lower priced CDs or if they are just losing money on them to benefit you.
Face it, the issue here is the same as the other "IP" battles like "obvious patents". If a controling monopoly is granted to someone, they will expolit it to the hilt to make windfall profits at the expense of anyone they can. Those profits do not go to the actual creator of the IP in most of the cases either. The musicians have little choice but to sign away the copyrights if they want distribution.
Depends. If the computer contains an improperly modified MR FUSION PC Card, ISA version, simply accessing the BIOS setup may be enough to inadvertantly trigger WW III...
Fascinating discussions on Life - Wish I had time to read all the comments in detail.
My intellect and knowledge are not better than most here so I will keep my comments to myself. However, I am occasionally granted an interview with The Creator(tm) who has graciously allowed me to post my translations of his responses to my questions about these matters. Please forgive any errors in my feeble attempts to compose His communications into limited human language concepts! His thoughts/expressions/? were roughly as follows:
1) He has deliberately initiated these discussions at this time for His purposes and will initiate many more soon.
2) He is vastly amused at the arrogance of those who think they can replace Him with the childish games they call "religion", "science", "government", etc...
3) A man instantly transported from a primitive society to an advanced society to observe a functioning television set could easily conclude that the contraption of glass, plastic, and metal was somehow "alive". Primitives cannot readily distinguish between carrier/medium and content/message. The day will come when you can see beyond the primitive biological constructs which limit you for now...
4) Creating "life" is a relatively simple followup technique once you have figured out how to construct a "space-time-energy" continuum which allows "event sequences" to generate a "quantum wavefront framework" which can be "limitedly influenced" by "life-forces" to collapse into new event sequences. You are begining to see that each "particle/wave" is recreated billions of times per second continuously, but you have a ways to go to begin to really understand the creation called "free will", etc...
5) His response to identity queries remains the same as given Moses (at a certain "burning bush" meeting) - "I exist because I exist". No one else can make this statement because everything else has an external cause/source... Human reason will never approach this simple power!
6) Humanity killed it's replacement ("Homo Superior" aka "son of man") ~2000 years ago, but could not even make that stick because it has no real understanding of "life"...
7) His plans are not threatened by anything "mankind" could think, say, or do. Our plans generally remain foolishly centered on our own meagre clinging to "life" unless He intervenes!
Sounds like someone needs to come up with an extension to digital signature technology for notarizing/verifying this type of document.
Seriously, the days of the mouse device are numbered. I deduce this from the fact that the only mouse I have seen used in Star Trek was the one Scotty tried to talk to in one of the movies.
Are there any better interface techniques on the horizon? Perhaps using this technology with one of those little cameras on top of the monitor to track eyeball position and shift focus to whatever you are looking at, for example? Along with two stage select buttons like some cameras give you with the good/bad warning on light touch and shutter release on heavy touch? (Light touch displays pointer, heavy touch gives "mouse click"...)