I've just downloaded M-0.6. I was using M18 before this and the new version seems a lot quicker. Now I'm running on a dual-PIII/750MHZ machine with 256M. But still the new version is quite a bit faster.
Early on I read that something like 90% of software development is spent doing maintenance programming. Some of this is doing legitimate upgrading, but a lot of it is just spent fixing bugs, and even a lot of time spent doing upgrades
would be more productive if the code were of better quality.
Actually "being in maintenance mode" is the natural place for software to be. If it's in "maintenace" that means the software is in production and being used.
It's the initial development that is an unnatural state (see Extreme Programming book by Kent Beck).
Just because the code seems shoddy now, doesn't mean it started that way. Perhaps the requirements changed as users got their hands on the system, or the enviroment changed...
About 200 years ago, when people lived/worked on farms there was no difference between work and home. The "office" and "work-place" is a somewhat artificial creation of the Industrial Revolution.
I'm not sure whether the new or the old system is better...
The concept is sound, and remember in space you have perpetual motion, you only need the sail and some sunlight to start you off, then your flying and you can litterally "surf" on the orbits created by celestial bodies so as to remain in motion
AFAIK, "solar wind" is actually a stream of highly charged particles streaming away form the Sun. Particles have more mass than photons, so they could potentially push a sail.
ZZT Next generation is called MegaZeux. It's still ASCII graphics, but you'd be amazed what some of the MegaZeux programmers can come up with in this restricted environment.
If you want to spend $200 get them the Lego Mindstorms kit. They'll get to build and program robots. When they get good, they can go past the silly language provided with Midstorms and move to NotQuite C and Linux for downloading code into the 'bots.
MegaZeux is a DOS/ASCII graphics game creation system (see: http://mworld.rydia.net/mzx.shtml). My son learned to program Megazeux by himself when he was 9. He just downloaded MegaZeux games and read the code. The nice thing about MegaZeux is that the end result is a computer game, so that keeps kids motivated.
Python should be great for kids, but you have to come up with some problems they would like to code. What do you do after "hello world"?
I think you misunderstood my comment. "C" is not meant to be the set of complex numbers, but the cardinality of the set of reals (it's usually written as 'c' - note lower case) Cardinality of real numbers and complex numbers is the same (as you say).
But the definition of Aleph1 is the cardinality of the power set (that is a set of all subsets) of a set with Aleph0 elements.
So the Continum hypothesis asks: Is the count of all subsets of integers the same as the number of real numbers. This turns out to be unprovable from the usual axioms of set theory.
BTW, Cantor proved early on that the cardinality of a power set of a non-empty set is strictly greater than the initial set (in the transfinite sense).
This is the "Continum Hypothesis". It was shown to be independent of the axioms of set theory. So you can assume that Aleph1 = c or that Aleph1/= c and get two different set theories.
Sort of like Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometries.
Ok so the average programmer does not sell shrinked-wrapped software, he sells his labour to generate software. But that doesn't substantially alter my argument.
But it does. Selling your labour is quite different from selling copies. With software, once the first copy is made, following copies cost nothing to create. If you got paid to make the first copy, then as a programmer you can make a living by getting paid for writing new code.
Banks and airlines can use and produce open source software. Especially when the software can be used to establish an open standard. Bussinesses can get more benefits from open standards than from closed source software.
Of course, there will always be software that is too closely tied to the bussiness that will be considered a trade secret and never released or sold.
So to summarize, it seems to me that programmers will always be needed to write new code and open source can only make the programmer's job more interesting, as you'll never have to implement the same thing over and over (like a web server).
Whether we like it or not one of the most effective ways to make money out of software - is to make it closed source and sell it.
I disagree I think you'll find that most programmers get paid for developing custom software for various companies (like banks, airlines etc), software which is never sold but only used by the company that funded the development.
Selling shrink-wrapped software like shoes only works for very few large companies (like MS).
On the other hand, using, supporting and applying free software (as in GPL) to solve people's problems keeps many programmers employed - many working alone or in small companies.
[...] most people who make these decisions are simply not going to build a product based on a language that comes from a small vendor. They would be betting many man-years of effort on the success of that one small vendor and be at the complete mercy of that company's future pricing policies and responsiveness.
In fact there are three small vendors today who sell Eiffel compilers and there is a GNU Eiffel compiler called SmallEiffel.
It's not clear at the moment whether the GNU Eiffel compiler has come too late.
What the Record Company provides : They provide the cost of recording,distribution, marketing, sales, A&R, etc,etc.
AFAIK, the record company does not pay for the recording costs or video costs, etc. The record company advances the band money for recording and so on, and then this money has to be paid back by the band when the CD is issued.
That's why, even if the album is successful, the artist can wind up broke (eg. TLC and the "Crazy, Sexy, Cool" CD). That's why many of the "one-hit-wonder" artists end up in serious debt.
In addition the record company usually keeps all the rights to the songs, so the artist is not allowed to record and distribute his own songs. For example, Roger McGuinn from "The Birds" (a sixties band) has several CDs of music on MP3.COM. But they only contain new songs, or folk songs that are in the public domain. It is illegal for him to record and distribute songs he wrote years ago.
I'd like to turn this around on you: mp3.com got started on the premise that they would bring unknown acts to the forefront of the Internet-using audience. I've found some really good local music via mp3.com. However, can any artist currently claim they got their Big Break from them? Probably not.
So what! I dearly hope that the idea of a "big break" and "getting really rich from one song" goes away. What we want is for artists to be able to make a good living producing the music they want, rather than what some record exec thinks will appeal to most people and result in largest profit.
The Internet and MP3s give the artists a chance to enlarge their audience and make more money as a result. If their audience is large enough, they will be able to make a living from playing music.
So, if you don't like the RIAA stance on this, don't support them by buying albums protected by them!
I don't (or nearly so, since they own so much stuff). I buy CD from MP3.COM and from a lot of small independent labels. Mostly because the music I like (jazz and blues) never makes it to MTV or commercial radio.
>Ownership of ideas and creative works is no longer a simple, black-or-white issue.
But it *is*. There's a law, it's called copyright, and it means if I make a creative work, it's mine to own all the rights to it. Distribution included.
But it is not. 100 years ago it was against the law for women to vote. It was the law!
150 years ago it was legal to own other people. You could beat them, kill them and make them work for you. That was the law them.
Just because there is a law, it doesn't make it right. Sometimes laws must change.
A Metallica fan rips his CDs and puts them up on the Net.
Who downloads the files? Not any serious Metallica fans - they already own the CDs and the T-shirts and posters.
Someone who has not heard enough Metallica music may download a file or two. He may like it or he may not.
If he likes the music he will download more and perhaps turn into a fan. A fan would prefer to own CDs, T-shirts and posters and would attend concerts.
What does Metallica do? They are trying to stop their fans from creating more Metallica fans.
All this excitement over the Internet is a bit overdone. The real communication revolution took place about 150 years ago when the telegraph was invented, and the telegraph network was built to span the world.
Just think, until the telegraph was in place the fastest way to deliver a message was at about 100 miles per day (via messanger on a horse). With the telegraph this changed dramatically. You could send a message to the other end of the world in minutes.
The Internet is just a refinement of this idea.
There is a neat book, called The Victorian Internet which discusses the history and social transformations that happened due to the telegraph.
I have the Gnome, GTK+ and "Essential Python" books from New Riders and I find them very good. The Python book is probably the best Python reference...
Please. Why do people feel the need to gloss over the purpose of programs like Napster and Gnutella. I'm an Open Source Programmer, and I know damn well that Napster is used to download illegal mp3s more than anything else. Same with Gnutella.
Napster and Gnutella are just for people who don't know how to se up FTP servers. Should we ban FTP because it can be used to download "illegal" MP3s?
...richie
Re:Is it so hard to accept the possibility?
on
The Mind of God
·
· Score: 1
You're right I don't believe in God. I find the concept meaningless - like division by zero.
The question of probabilities had to do with deducing the existence of God from the fact that people and the universe exists.
What I was trying to say, that the event of humans coming into existance is a low probability event, which nevertheless occured. The fact that probability of something is very low, does not preclude the event from occuring, without the intervention of any supernatural being.
The other point to be made here is that training in physics doesn't necessarily prepare one to be a philospher. That's why I'm very skeptical of these physicists turning into philosophers.
After all how would you react if a philosopher started writing books on physics?
Being an expert in one field does not make you an expert in another.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually "being in maintenance mode" is the natural place for software to be. If it's in "maintenace" that means the software is in production and being used.
It's the initial development that is an unnatural state (see Extreme Programming book by Kent Beck).
Just because the code seems shoddy now, doesn't mean it started that way. Perhaps the requirements changed as users got their hands on the system, or the enviroment changed...
I'm not sure whether the new or the old system is better...
AFAIK, "solar wind" is actually a stream of highly charged particles streaming away form the Sun. Particles have more mass than photons, so they could potentially push a sail.
MegaZeux is a DOS/ASCII graphics game creation system (see: http://mworld.rydia.net/mzx.shtml). My son learned to program Megazeux by himself when he was 9. He just downloaded MegaZeux games and read the code. The nice thing about MegaZeux is that the end result is a computer game, so that keeps kids motivated.
Python should be great for kids, but you have to come up with some problems they would like to code. What do you do after "hello world"?
I think you misunderstood my comment. "C" is not meant to be the set of complex numbers, but the cardinality of the set of reals (it's usually written as 'c' - note lower case) Cardinality of real numbers and complex numbers is the same (as you say).
But the definition of Aleph1 is the cardinality of the power set (that is a set of all subsets) of a set with Aleph0 elements.
So the Continum hypothesis asks: Is the count of all subsets of integers the same as the number of real numbers. This turns out to be unprovable from the usual axioms of set theory.
BTW, Cantor proved early on that the cardinality of a power set of a non-empty set is strictly greater than the initial set (in the transfinite sense).
Hope this is clearer.
Sort of like Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometries.
But it does. Selling your labour is quite different from selling copies. With software, once the first copy is made, following copies cost nothing to create. If you got paid to make the first copy, then as a programmer you can make a living by getting paid for writing new code.
Banks and airlines can use and produce open source software. Especially when the software can be used to establish an open standard. Bussinesses can get more benefits from open standards than from closed source software.
Of course, there will always be software that is too closely tied to the bussiness that will be considered a trade secret and never released or sold.
So to summarize, it seems to me that programmers will always be needed to write new code and open source can only make the programmer's job more interesting, as you'll never have to implement the same thing over and over (like a web server).
I disagree I think you'll find that most programmers get paid for developing custom software for various companies (like banks, airlines etc), software which is never sold but only used by the company that funded the development.
Selling shrink-wrapped software like shoes only works for very few large companies (like MS).
On the other hand, using, supporting and applying free software (as in GPL) to solve people's problems keeps many programmers employed - many working alone or in small companies.
http://www.loria.fr/projets/SmallEiffel
In fact there are three small vendors today who sell Eiffel compilers and there is a GNU Eiffel compiler called SmallEiffel.
It's not clear at the moment whether the GNU Eiffel compiler has come too late.
But people are not buying CDs, instead they swap MP3s on Napster. Why do you think Napster is so popular?
What do the record companies do? Lower prices? No. They send their lawyers to stop Napster...
AFAIK, the record company does not pay for the recording costs or video costs, etc. The record company advances the band money for recording and so on, and then this money has to be paid back by the band when the CD is issued.
That's why, even if the album is successful, the artist can wind up broke (eg. TLC and the "Crazy, Sexy, Cool" CD). That's why many of the "one-hit-wonder" artists end up in serious debt.
In addition the record company usually keeps all the rights to the songs, so the artist is not allowed to record and distribute his own songs. For example, Roger McGuinn from "The Birds" (a sixties band) has several CDs of music on MP3.COM. But they only contain new songs, or folk songs that are in the public domain. It is illegal for him to record and distribute songs he wrote years ago.
So much for protecting the artists...
So what! I dearly hope that the idea of a "big break" and "getting really rich from one song" goes away. What we want is for artists to be able to make a good living producing the music they want, rather than what some record exec thinks will appeal to most people and result in largest profit.
The Internet and MP3s give the artists a chance to enlarge their audience and make more money as a result. If their audience is large enough, they will be able to make a living from playing music.
So, if you don't like the RIAA stance on this, don't support them by buying albums protected by them!
I don't (or nearly so, since they own so much stuff). I buy CD from MP3.COM and from a lot of small independent labels. Mostly because the music I like (jazz and blues) never makes it to MTV or commercial radio.
But it *is*. There's a law, it's called copyright, and it means if I make a creative work, it's mine to own all the rights to it. Distribution included.
But it is not. 100 years ago it was against the law for women to vote. It was the law!
150 years ago it was legal to own other people. You could beat them, kill them and make them work for you. That was the law them.
Just because there is a law, it doesn't make it right. Sometimes laws must change.
What does Metallica do? They are trying to stop their fans from creating more Metallica fans.
Duh!
Just think, until the telegraph was in place the fastest way to deliver a message was at about 100 miles per day (via messanger on a horse). With the telegraph this changed dramatically. You could send a message to the other end of the world in minutes.
The Internet is just a refinement of this idea.
There is a neat book, called The Victorian Internet which discusses the history and social transformations that happened due to the telegraph.
Hey, the reporting is annonymous. So who is to say that you are not in high school?
Napster and Gnutella are just for people who don't know how to se up FTP servers. Should we ban FTP because it can be used to download "illegal" MP3s?
The question of probabilities had to do with deducing the existence of God from the fact that people and the universe exists.
What I was trying to say, that the event of humans coming into existance is a low probability event, which nevertheless occured. The fact that probability of something is very low, does not preclude the event from occuring, without the intervention of any supernatural being.
After all how would you react if a philosopher started writing books on physics?
Being an expert in one field does not make you an expert in another.