If programmers could write code ten times faster, that executes a tenth as quickly, that would actually be a beneficial trade-off for many (most?) organisations. High-level languages help with programmer productivity.
I wrote my company's web application in Python on Zope. Although neither of those are screamingly fast by themselves, most of the real work is done by calls to PostgreSQL and Imagemagick. Our production server is currently 72% idle with a load average of 0.48.
I have a lot of easy-to-read high level code that isn't a maintenance problem, and my application code could take ten times as long to execute and the machine would still have plenty of cycles left over to keep up with demandJ. There are places where bare metal optimization is appropriate, but I'm more than happy to glue that stuff together with code that lets me concentrate on algorithms instead of implementation.
It has paintbrush (In the tools palet), line (Hold SHIFT while using paintbrush or pencil tool), circle (Use circle select tool, then click Edit -> Stroke Selection).
And to think that people say it's not intuitive.
Re:This is why I don't use GIMP
on
Beginning GIMP
·
· Score: 1
Photoshop has a really great interface.
...where "great" is defined as "acts like Photoshop". It's downright weird by any other standard.
First Krita post
on
Beginning GIMP
·
· Score: 3, Informative
I like The GIMP and still use it most often for routine graphics stuff. However, I've recently come to love the direction Krita is going. A lot of it is personal preference, just as the single-window interface, but some of its features are very nice (like built-in CMYK, color management, a line drawing tool that works like you'd expect it to, and a file chooser that doesn't make me want to commit hari kari).
It's not perfect, and not quite yet a complete replacement for The GIMP, but it's close enough that I've started testing it on a regular basis. If you simply can't wrap your brain around GIMP, then it's probably worth your time to check out Krita.
On a side rant, everyone bitches about the SUVs, like somehow the SUV has caused gas prices to rise dramatically
It has. You can't double the average fuel consumption per person-mile in a country and not expect the law of supply and demand to kick in. I'm an economic conservative - I don't care if you drive a spotted owl oil fueled Escalade - but it's ridiculous to think that bigger vehicles with higher consumption won't drive up prices for everyone.
If you're a construction worker and have to drag your tools around in a half-ton pickup, fine. Need a Suburban to haul gear back and forth to the ranch? No problem. Drive a Yukon to pick up the kids from school? You're a sociopathic asshole who doesn't understand economics or government crash test results. It's currently your right to do such things, but don't be surprised if you don't get any love for it.
The petitioners are asking for the details of the protocols, not the exact implementation of those protocols. Maybe their code is ancient and crufty and you could reimplement it in 10,000 lines of C instead of 150,000 if only you knew exactly how they worked. That is what they're requesting.
If it actually worked as advertised, that'd be something I'd want to use. The correct answer for companies is to 1) forbid its use (just like you wouldn't let employees PGP-encrypt their work), and 2) find out how to disable it in Active Directory. Don't just dike out the functionality, though!
I wrote a blog for Free Software Magazine about the dangers of buying into a proprietary system. In summary, if you give up the freedom to make your own IT decisions, you can expect to pay for it (and dearly). It's no fun to have your core logic hostage to the whims of a third party who doesn't know you exist and wouldn't care if they did. We're doing new development in Python, and while I hope that people keep updating it, we don't go out of business if they stop.
Because they claim that Page Rank is an automated, objective measure of a site's relevance.
A question, then: is it ever possible to incorporate a blacklist into an automated, objective measure and have it retain that status? Suppose that blacklist had very objective criteria: "people who are suing us". Would that pass the test?
I'm not arguing one way or the other, just curious about what other people think of it.
The judge says he's open to the idea that if Google manually changed the pagerank to zero, then maybe it's defamation, which is a valid reason to bring a suit. It's equivalent to saying, out loud and deliberately, "You suck".
I suppose I can see that from a legal standpoint. Still, what's wrong with Google saying "they suck" when specifically asked? It seems like the difference between me standing on a corner shouting "kinderstart is worthless" and saying the same thing in response to someone asking me what I thought of them. Again, ignoring the legal aspects (IANAL), is the latter really defamation?
By the way, the "open for refiling" thing means that they can sue again if they thing Google MANUALLY changed the ranking, it's not really relevant to the case.
Even then, though, why shouldn't they be free to manually change the ranking if they wanted to? It's their wholly-owned database, so is there any reason they should be kept from altering their own data?
Sometime, the only incentive for lawyers to pursue class action lawsuit is the insane amount of money they make from it.
"Give lawyers more money" is never, never the correct solution. The honest ones won't change their practice, but the scummy ones will flock to it instantly. Well, right now we're in the position that only the scummy ones seem to be profiting - when was the last time you heard of a morally legitimate class action lawsuit? - so that would tend to indicate we've gone way too far in the wrong direction.
So they fixed prices, so what, memory prices in the mid/late nineties plummited.
In other news, transistor densities doubled every 18 months or so during the same timeframe. Also, water is wet and the sun is hot. In what way does anything you or I said make it OK for a company to break the law?
Punitive damages should be paid to the government, with no lawyers' cut. Then we'd see how concerned the plaintiffs and lawyers really are about serving humanity through lawsuits.
EXACTLY! I think it's important to allow punitive damages because sometimes they're the only incentive an entity has to act responsibly. However, I don't see any justification for allowing another entity to profit from that penalty.
If a policeman writes me a speeding ticket, he doesn't get a percentage of the fee, and that's how it should be: it eliminates the personal profit motive from the justice equation. Ask for punitive damages because it's the right thing to do in your own situation, not because you want to get rich from it.
If you are in need of a strong password, use the following recipe:
A password generating algorithm that doesn't use acronyms like "AES", "PRNG", etc. doesn't meet the definition of "strong". The problem with your method is that it's extremely vulnerable to frequency analysis. For example, the results will almost never contain the substrings "zq", "xg", "uz". That doesn't necessarily make your passwords week, but they definitely fall short of being cryptographically random.
A better approach is to use something like "pwgen -s" to create one really good password. Then, use that as the encryption password on a database storing all your other computer-generated passwords. I couldn't give you my online banking password if you put a gun to my head since I only saw it once: when I was copying-and-pasting the output of pwgen into my webbrowser.
Fact is home school kids do just fine in society, many scoring far higher than their peers.
In the town where we live, the public schools are excellent. Still, an appreciable portion of our friends and acquaintances home school, often stopping when their kids enter high school. As far as I know, none of them are doing it for religious reasons. They just want their kids to have an even better education than the public schools can manage (whether they actually achieve that is another story, but that's the honest intent). Every kid that I know that home schooled through elementary and junior high is excelling in high school.
My kids are in the public schools (yay, public-funded Montessori!), but I'd probably home school em' if I could. Mom is a surgeon who minored in German and also studied history voraciously, dad is a comp sci guy who minored in physics and took polysci and philosophy courses for fun. Yeah, I think we're qualified to teach them a few things.
And socialization? I'd be hard-pressed to find something I cared less about. I was "socialized" until it almost broke me. My kids aren't my clones, of course, but if they do happen to follow in my footsteps then I'll cross off "peer interaction" as something I'll never consider.
If they wanted to be around other kids, we'd sign them up for non-school-league sports (or more precisely, we'd continue the ones they're already in). If they really need peer interaction for academic studies, we'd get them together with the home schooled kids. I haven't met one yet that I wouldn't want my kids to hang out with.
This is a good idea, although distribution is a problem. The key could be sent in an encrypted mail to the user, with the password set to something specified in another encrypted mail.
Ummm, no. Debian takes the whole "web of trust" thing seriously. That means that developer joecoder@example.com generates his own SSH public key and sends it in a signed email to the development server's administrator. That person verifies the email signature and puts the key in ~joecoder/.ssh/authorized_keys. Nothing more need be done.
Slashdot Mirror
I wrote my company's web application in Python on Zope. Although neither of those are screamingly fast by themselves, most of the real work is done by calls to PostgreSQL and Imagemagick. Our production server is currently 72% idle with a load average of 0.48.
I have a lot of easy-to-read high level code that isn't a maintenance problem, and my application code could take ten times as long to execute and the machine would still have plenty of cycles left over to keep up with demandJ. There are places where bare metal optimization is appropriate, but I'm more than happy to glue that stuff together with code that lets me concentrate on algorithms instead of implementation.
No, but neither does anything else.
No, I meant hari kari. I'm American, you sensitive clod!
It is. Trivia: GTK is "The GIMP Toolkit", that is the toolkit the GIMP guys wrote to implement it.
And to think that people say it's not intuitive.
...where "great" is defined as "acts like Photoshop". It's downright weird by any other standard.
It's not perfect, and not quite yet a complete replacement for The GIMP, but it's close enough that I've started testing it on a regular basis. If you simply can't wrap your brain around GIMP, then it's probably worth your time to check out Krita.
You mean, like Keifer as the vampire David in "The Lost Boys"? Yeah, he could never pull that off. <rolls eyes at kids these days>
It has. You can't double the average fuel consumption per person-mile in a country and not expect the law of supply and demand to kick in. I'm an economic conservative - I don't care if you drive a spotted owl oil fueled Escalade - but it's ridiculous to think that bigger vehicles with higher consumption won't drive up prices for everyone.
If you're a construction worker and have to drag your tools around in a half-ton pickup, fine. Need a Suburban to haul gear back and forth to the ranch? No problem. Drive a Yukon to pick up the kids from school? You're a sociopathic asshole who doesn't understand economics or government crash test results. It's currently your right to do such things, but don't be surprised if you don't get any love for it.
The petitioners are asking for the details of the protocols, not the exact implementation of those protocols. Maybe their code is ancient and crufty and you could reimplement it in 10,000 lines of C instead of 150,000 if only you knew exactly how they worked. That is what they're requesting.
If it actually worked as advertised, that'd be something I'd want to use. The correct answer for companies is to 1) forbid its use (just like you wouldn't let employees PGP-encrypt their work), and 2) find out how to disable it in Active Directory. Don't just dike out the functionality, though!
Second, "if url in blacklist: return 0" is an algorithm.
I wrote a blog for Free Software Magazine about the dangers of buying into a proprietary system. In summary, if you give up the freedom to make your own IT decisions, you can expect to pay for it (and dearly). It's no fun to have your core logic hostage to the whims of a third party who doesn't know you exist and wouldn't care if they did. We're doing new development in Python, and while I hope that people keep updating it, we don't go out of business if they stop.
A question, then: is it ever possible to incorporate a blacklist into an automated, objective measure and have it retain that status? Suppose that blacklist had very objective criteria: "people who are suing us". Would that pass the test?
I'm not arguing one way or the other, just curious about what other people think of it.
I suppose I can see that from a legal standpoint. Still, what's wrong with Google saying "they suck" when specifically asked? It seems like the difference between me standing on a corner shouting "kinderstart is worthless" and saying the same thing in response to someone asking me what I thought of them. Again, ignoring the legal aspects (IANAL), is the latter really defamation?
Don't be obtuse. There's a big difference between libel and stating that you don't like someone when asked about them.
Even then, though, why shouldn't they be free to manually change the ranking if they wanted to? It's their wholly-owned database, so is there any reason they should be kept from altering their own data?
"Give lawyers more money" is never, never the correct solution. The honest ones won't change their practice, but the scummy ones will flock to it instantly. Well, right now we're in the position that only the scummy ones seem to be profiting - when was the last time you heard of a morally legitimate class action lawsuit? - so that would tend to indicate we've gone way too far in the wrong direction.
In other news, transistor densities doubled every 18 months or so during the same timeframe. Also, water is wet and the sun is hot. In what way does anything you or I said make it OK for a company to break the law?
EXACTLY! I think it's important to allow punitive damages because sometimes they're the only incentive an entity has to act responsibly. However, I don't see any justification for allowing another entity to profit from that penalty.
If a policeman writes me a speeding ticket, he doesn't get a percentage of the fee, and that's how it should be: it eliminates the personal profit motive from the justice equation. Ask for punitive damages because it's the right thing to do in your own situation, not because you want to get rich from it.
A password generating algorithm that doesn't use acronyms like "AES", "PRNG", etc. doesn't meet the definition of "strong". The problem with your method is that it's extremely vulnerable to frequency analysis. For example, the results will almost never contain the substrings "zq", "xg", "uz". That doesn't necessarily make your passwords week, but they definitely fall short of being cryptographically random.
A better approach is to use something like "pwgen -s" to create one really good password. Then, use that as the encryption password on a database storing all your other computer-generated passwords. I couldn't give you my online banking password if you put a gun to my head since I only saw it once: when I was copying-and-pasting the output of pwgen into my webbrowser.
In the town where we live, the public schools are excellent. Still, an appreciable portion of our friends and acquaintances home school, often stopping when their kids enter high school. As far as I know, none of them are doing it for religious reasons. They just want their kids to have an even better education than the public schools can manage (whether they actually achieve that is another story, but that's the honest intent). Every kid that I know that home schooled through elementary and junior high is excelling in high school.
My kids are in the public schools (yay, public-funded Montessori!), but I'd probably home school em' if I could. Mom is a surgeon who minored in German and also studied history voraciously, dad is a comp sci guy who minored in physics and took polysci and philosophy courses for fun. Yeah, I think we're qualified to teach them a few things.
And socialization? I'd be hard-pressed to find something I cared less about. I was "socialized" until it almost broke me. My kids aren't my clones, of course, but if they do happen to follow in my footsteps then I'll cross off "peer interaction" as something I'll never consider.
If they wanted to be around other kids, we'd sign them up for non-school-league sports (or more precisely, we'd continue the ones they're already in). If they really need peer interaction for academic studies, we'd get them together with the home schooled kids. I haven't met one yet that I wouldn't want my kids to hang out with.
Ummm, no. Debian takes the whole "web of trust" thing seriously. That means that developer joecoder@example.com generates his own SSH public key and sends it in a signed email to the development server's administrator. That person verifies the email signature and puts the key in ~joecoder/.ssh/authorized_keys. Nothing more need be done.
About half those 15 are in the context of people in dire circumstances. The rest were just thrown in for the fun of it.
But it does support versioning the symlink itself (per the FAQ). Do you really want to store multiple copies of the symlink's source?