Somebody who is 70 would have been born in 1940. I'm pretty sure they would have grown up with technology their entire lives.
The first GUI I used was on the Xerox Star system my mom administered. Poor ignorant woman - all she could do is hack mainframes and run big client/server installations. If only she'd been been born in the Xbox Generation, she could've learned all about how to use (and not merely implement) technology.
For example, what should professional musicians do, only record advertisements?
How many copies of albums do professional musicians typically sell 5 years after release day? A tiny minority of generation-defining albums will continue to sell, but I think Britney's pretty much seen all the money from "Oops! I Did It Again" that she's ever going to (assuming that her label ever actually paid her for it in the first place).
People who would stand to lose from the Pirate Party's idea: The Beatles, Pink Floyd, and Led Zeppelin. People who would stand to gain from it: everyone else.
(At the risk of answering my own, previous question) what protection do 'unpublished' works have?
Ideally? None. The purpose of copyright and patents is:
To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.
An unpublished work does nothing to "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts", and the Constitution (which provides the legal basis for copyright) doesn't have an opinion on it.
Also, MS extended their community promise (apparently legally binding) to not go after mono with patents:
No, they didn't. From your second link:
Microsoft irrevocably promises not to assert any Microsoft Necessary Claims against you for making, using, selling, offering for sale, importing or distributing any implementation, to the extent it conforms to one of the Covered Specifications, and is compliant with all of the required parts of the mandatory provisions of that specification ("Covered Implementation")
If Mono (or any other.NET implementation) fails a test suite, all bets are off.
So Apple's solution will be worse at "monetizing free applications" than the myriad of home-rolled solutions that currently exist, to the point that all the others will suddenly stop working? I don't get your logic here.
Mac OS 9 and earlier only had "co operative" multitasking and Mac zealots of the day used to proclaim it was better than "true" multitasking and came up with all sorts of rationales for it, until OS X came along of course.
Fun fact: holding down the mouse button gave full CPU to the GUI. Our web design guy used a Mac (of course), and shared a few folders to us unglamorous Linux users. If you were copying a file off his machine, the transfer would sometimes freeze while he clicked and dragged stuff around on his desktop. This did not endear his chosen OS to the rest of us.
If it starts losing money and he gets bored, who is going to keep all those employees in paychecks?
And this differs from every other business in what way? The only thing keeping me employed today is that my company's owner still likes running his business. Should that ever change, he owes me no responsibility to keep running it to meet my needs. Yes, it'd suck if he decided to close the doors one day, but that's why I'm careful about whom I choose to work for.
I think a lot of these ideas have been around for a very long time but they are such a pain in the ass, very few people actually use them.
I use FreeBSD jails all the time. Want a fresh, new environment for testing? ezjail-admin create testenvironment.example.com 10.20.1.5, ssh in, and start working on it. My understanding is that you're limited in practice to several tens of thousands of jails per machine, but I haven't bumped up against that yet.
Many people would agree that the action in the first case is immoral, despite the fact that no harm was done, and that the action in the second case is morally innocent if unfortunate.
Good illustration. Thanks! I'd thought they were drawing a line between "immoral" actions and "harmless" actions, not between "immoral" and "worked out OK on accident".
The researchers found that when the RTPJ was disrupted volunteers were more likely to judge actions solely on the basis of whether they caused harm — not whether they were morally wrong in themselves.
What distinction are they making between the two? There are philosophies that would hold the two ideas as identical.
If you think a DB engine is fast, try doing joins and stuff between tables
Jjjjjj...oins? What are those?
Seriously, I can think of a specific query I run that involves 3 or 4 subselects (depending on options passed to it), joins between multiple large tables, and predicates with values like "SUBSTR(UPPER(foo), 1, STRPOS(foo, ',') - 1)" that runs in milliseconds on PostgreSQL. The easiest "trick" is to see what EXPLAIN is doing and make sure you've got indexes on the join columns. In 99% of cases, assuming the query is actually sane (that is, you're not doing a cartesian join in a subselect then filtering the results later), that's enough.
Another huge optimization is to do as much filtering as possible in PostgreSQL itself. The other common bottleneck is asking for way too much data ("SELECT * FROM t1 JOIN t2 on t1.key1 = t2.key1 JOIN t3 on t2.key2 = t3.key2") then winnowing the tuples on the client. You're almost always far better off selecting only the rows columns you actually need.
There. That's almost the entirety of my database tuning "magic" that actually gets used in production. I've got PostgreSQL set to log all queries that take longer than 3 seconds. Daily, that comes out to 10-20 queries total on a fairly heavily loaded server. I can live with that.
query optimizers may be able to do a decent job on average, but once you go large databases (multi-million dataset tables), planing the query structure will go a long way preserving performance.
Yes one can write complicated queries to return exactly what you want in one query, but in many cases doing some logic around it and using smart grouping/loops will outperform the complex query...
No offense, but are you primarily used to MySQL? My company's PostgreSQL tables are (I think) pretty small, on the order of a few tens of millions of rows in the larger ones. They're small enough that I've never bothered with setting up partitioning; each table really is just a big ol' table. Still, they're big enough to benefit from approaching them intelligently. In every case when smart goruping and loops were running too slow, I found that replacing the client-side mess with a few complex queries fixed the problem. In short, its query analyzer is far better at optimization than we are, on average. A database is exceedingly good at managing data. Why not let it?
Yes, baseless. Or, perhaps *you've* managed to find these mythical patents MS has on.NET that it will supposedly use to blugeon the entire OSS community to death with?
You're confused and thinking of the patents that Ballmer claimed that Linux violated but has never produced. No one has ever seriously disputed that parts of.NET are patented, least of all Microsoft (who filed them) and Novell (who signed an indemnification contract covering them).
Java's virtual machine (specially Sun/OpenJDK) is much more advanced than Python's (CPython).
That's just comparing specific implementations, though. IronPython is JIT compiled, I think. PyPy targets LLVM and I'm pretty sure it's JIT compiled, too.
Java's class library is primarily Java code, whereas Python wraps native libraries for much of this work. Both methods have their pros and cons, but it means Python can be prone to more issues regarding different system libraries, etc. Since Java provides it's own virtual platform with most of the code in Java, you don't have these issues as often,
I guess I'm not seeing the difference between Java-the-platform (JVM + Java-the-language + buttload of libraries) and Python-the-platform (PythonVM + Python-the-language + buttload of libraries). That was what I meant.
So why would you care if Microsoft used their software patents to destroy a project you don't care about?
Because the project's advocates are trying to get it used all over the place, with an eventual certainty that it will end up affecting some project or another that I do care about.
Python is great at what it does but it's a scripting language not a virtual platform like Java.
Please explain. Python is compiled into bytecode, then executed on a VM. Java is compiled into bytecode, then executed on a VM. What substantial distinction would you draw between the two?
I know, amazing! Some people might *actually* disagree with you, oh wise and omniscient one!
That's fine when the subject at hand doesn't matter. In this case, no one with a sense of history and a functional intellect disagrees. The only counterarguments are from people who are ignorant of the fact that Microsoft has threatened to use their software patents to destroy FOSS projects, or who have reason not to care.
That's a shame. I'd thought that after all this time he was finally wising up and accepting what everyone else on the planet was saying. I guess either he hasn't put his fanatical devotion to his employer aside (does anyone really believe that he didn't get the job he applied for at Microsoft?) or that his boss told him to back down. Either way, too bad. He's a talented guy and I wish he would work on something useful and less poisonous.
Slashdot Mirror
To the point that it locked out the network stack? Not saying it's impossible, but that seems pretty unlikely. Can you find a reference to it?
Somebody who is 70 would have been born in 1940. I'm pretty sure they would have grown up with technology their entire lives.
The first GUI I used was on the Xerox Star system my mom administered. Poor ignorant woman - all she could do is hack mainframes and run big client/server installations. If only she'd been been born in the Xbox Generation, she could've learned all about how to use (and not merely implement) technology.
True, the default for your car is also not to be ownable, I'll be taking it now.
From 1700 years ago:
My car would be diminished by sharing it with you. A song I wrote would not be.
For example, what should professional musicians do, only record advertisements?
How many copies of albums do professional musicians typically sell 5 years after release day? A tiny minority of generation-defining albums will continue to sell, but I think Britney's pretty much seen all the money from "Oops! I Did It Again" that she's ever going to (assuming that her label ever actually paid her for it in the first place).
People who would stand to lose from the Pirate Party's idea: The Beatles, Pink Floyd, and Led Zeppelin. People who would stand to gain from it: everyone else.
(At the risk of answering my own, previous question) what protection do 'unpublished' works have?
Ideally? None. The purpose of copyright and patents is:
An unpublished work does nothing to "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts", and the Constitution (which provides the legal basis for copyright) doesn't have an opinion on it.
I don't get the big hang-up with version numbers. Who cares if it is 2.30 or 3.0?
3.0 is in an entirely different series from 2.30. For comparison, KDE 4 isn't just KDE 3.6 with an updated major version number.
Also, MS extended their community promise (apparently legally binding) to not go after mono with patents:
No, they didn't. From your second link:
If Mono (or any other .NET implementation) fails a test suite, all bets are off.
So Apple's solution will be worse at "monetizing free applications" than the myriad of home-rolled solutions that currently exist, to the point that all the others will suddenly stop working? I don't get your logic here.
Mac OS 9 and earlier only had "co operative" multitasking and Mac zealots of the day used to proclaim it was better than "true" multitasking and came up with all sorts of rationales for it, until OS X came along of course.
Fun fact: holding down the mouse button gave full CPU to the GUI. Our web design guy used a Mac (of course), and shared a few folders to us unglamorous Linux users. If you were copying a file off his machine, the transfer would sometimes freeze while he clicked and dragged stuff around on his desktop. This did not endear his chosen OS to the rest of us.
If it starts losing money and he gets bored, who is going to keep all those employees in paychecks?
And this differs from every other business in what way? The only thing keeping me employed today is that my company's owner still likes running his business. Should that ever change, he owes me no responsibility to keep running it to meet my needs. Yes, it'd suck if he decided to close the doors one day, but that's why I'm careful about whom I choose to work for.
I think a lot of these ideas have been around for a very long time but they are such a pain in the ass, very few people actually use them.
I use FreeBSD jails all the time. Want a fresh, new environment for testing? ezjail-admin create testenvironment.example.com 10.20.1.5, ssh in, and start working on it. My understanding is that you're limited in practice to several tens of thousands of jails per machine, but I haven't bumped up against that yet.
Many people would agree that the action in the first case is immoral, despite the fact that no harm was done, and that the action in the second case is morally innocent if unfortunate.
Good illustration. Thanks! I'd thought they were drawing a line between "immoral" actions and "harmless" actions, not between "immoral" and "worked out OK on accident".
The researchers found that when the RTPJ was disrupted volunteers were more likely to judge actions solely on the basis of whether they caused harm — not whether they were morally wrong in themselves.
What distinction are they making between the two? There are philosophies that would hold the two ideas as identical.
If you think a DB engine is fast, try doing joins and stuff between tables
Jjjjjj...oins? What are those?
Seriously, I can think of a specific query I run that involves 3 or 4 subselects (depending on options passed to it), joins between multiple large tables, and predicates with values like "SUBSTR(UPPER(foo), 1, STRPOS(foo, ',') - 1)" that runs in milliseconds on PostgreSQL. The easiest "trick" is to see what EXPLAIN is doing and make sure you've got indexes on the join columns. In 99% of cases, assuming the query is actually sane (that is, you're not doing a cartesian join in a subselect then filtering the results later), that's enough.
Another huge optimization is to do as much filtering as possible in PostgreSQL itself. The other common bottleneck is asking for way too much data ("SELECT * FROM t1 JOIN t2 on t1.key1 = t2.key1 JOIN t3 on t2.key2 = t3.key2") then winnowing the tuples on the client. You're almost always far better off selecting only the rows columns you actually need.
There. That's almost the entirety of my database tuning "magic" that actually gets used in production. I've got PostgreSQL set to log all queries that take longer than 3 seconds. Daily, that comes out to 10-20 queries total on a fairly heavily loaded server. I can live with that.
query optimizers may be able to do a decent job on average, but once you go large databases (multi-million dataset tables), planing the query structure will go a long way preserving performance. Yes one can write complicated queries to return exactly what you want in one query, but in many cases doing some logic around it and using smart grouping/loops will outperform the complex query ...
No offense, but are you primarily used to MySQL? My company's PostgreSQL tables are (I think) pretty small, on the order of a few tens of millions of rows in the larger ones. They're small enough that I've never bothered with setting up partitioning; each table really is just a big ol' table. Still, they're big enough to benefit from approaching them intelligently. In every case when smart goruping and loops were running too slow, I found that replacing the client-side mess with a few complex queries fixed the problem. In short, its query analyzer is far better at optimization than we are, on average. A database is exceedingly good at managing data. Why not let it?
Yes, baseless. Or, perhaps *you've* managed to find these mythical patents MS has on .NET that it will supposedly use to blugeon the entire OSS community to death with?
You mean the nonexistent ones that Miguel's company didn't sign a contract with Microsoft not indemnifying their customers from? Or did you mean ones that Microsoft would have filed if they were into such things?
You're confused and thinking of the patents that Ballmer claimed that Linux violated but has never produced. No one has ever seriously disputed that parts of .NET are patented, least of all Microsoft (who filed them) and Novell (who signed an indemnification contract covering them).
Java's virtual machine (specially Sun/OpenJDK) is much more advanced than Python's (CPython).
That's just comparing specific implementations, though. IronPython is JIT compiled, I think. PyPy targets LLVM and I'm pretty sure it's JIT compiled, too.
Java's class library is primarily Java code, whereas Python wraps native libraries for much of this work. Both methods have their pros and cons, but it means Python can be prone to more issues regarding different system libraries, etc. Since Java provides it's own virtual platform with most of the code in Java, you don't have these issues as often,
OK, I'll buy that.
I guess I'm not seeing the difference between Java-the-platform (JVM + Java-the-language + buttload of libraries) and Python-the-platform (PythonVM + Python-the-language + buttload of libraries). That was what I meant.
So why would you care if Microsoft used their software patents to destroy a project you don't care about?
Because the project's advocates are trying to get it used all over the place, with an eventual certainty that it will end up affecting some project or another that I do care about.
Python is great at what it does but it's a scripting language not a virtual platform like Java.
Please explain. Python is compiled into bytecode, then executed on a VM. Java is compiled into bytecode, then executed on a VM. What substantial distinction would you draw between the two?
Oh yeah, and coded in HTML so it matches corporate colours.
Does it take more ink to print text that's been formatted in HTML?
I know, amazing! Some people might *actually* disagree with you, oh wise and omniscient one!
That's fine when the subject at hand doesn't matter. In this case, no one with a sense of history and a functional intellect disagrees. The only counterarguments are from people who are ignorant of the fact that Microsoft has threatened to use their software patents to destroy FOSS projects, or who have reason not to care.
Instead they specifically promised in writing not to do that.
They most absolutely did not. They promised not to annihilate any 100% compatible implementations.
That's a shame. I'd thought that after all this time he was finally wising up and accepting what everyone else on the planet was saying. I guess either he hasn't put his fanatical devotion to his employer aside (does anyone really believe that he didn't get the job he applied for at Microsoft?) or that his boss told him to back down. Either way, too bad. He's a talented guy and I wish he would work on something useful and less poisonous.
First, ever heard of context? Facebook is the most popular social networking site.
Second, ever heard of the news? Facebook beat Google two weeks ago.