I tried to use The GIMP a few times and was profoundly frustrated. I found Photoshop much easier to learn. I can't say how they compare for expert users, because I don't know The GIMP and am only moderately advanced with Photoshop.
It is difficult for people who have never used it. As is pretty much anything else.
Although I happen to agree with the first sentence, the idea that "anything else" that someone has never used is automatically difficult to use is ridiculous. People use lots of things every day that they've never seen before quite well. Most of these things are not as complex as The GIMP or Photoshop, but what a lot of people want to do with The GIMP or Photoshop isn't that complex, either.
Things can be designed to be easy to use for first-time use (ATMs should be this way). They can also be designed to work really well for experts (I like emacs because of this). It is often difficult to do both in the same interface/device.
It may be better now, but it used to be a huge pain in Tcl to get things to evaluate in the context you wanted, because it doesn't have lambdas/closures. The "everything is a string" approach works ok for small programs and makes the learning curve shallow, but I found I hit a ceiling really fast. The only good thing about Tcl is that it comes with Tk, but since Tk is accessible from other languages, like Python and Perl, I'm happy to avoid Tcl.
YMMV, of course, but I prefer a language with real control structures and data types.
That's a great idea, but the pay is pretty bad. I'd be willing to work there for somewhat less than I'd make in industry, but I looked into working there, and I'd be making a lot less: 30-40% less. And the DC area isn't exactly inexpensive to live in. I have a PhD, so maybe I'm overqualified/educated, but they really ought to have a few PhDs there and it's going to be hard to attract good ones with those wages.
I disagree that the Newton failed due to poor usability. I think it was two other reasons: it was too expensive and it was the wrong size. I used one for years, and found it too big to carry everywhere, yet too small to take as many notes on as my 8.5x11" paper notebook (or even my steno pad).
So now I carry a Palm everywhere, for calendar, phone book, and quick notes, and take a steno pad to meetings, seminars, etc. Actually, I often take my laptop to meetings, too, in case they're boring. I'd love to be able to take a tablet-sized computer, instead, but I want one that was designed for pen-based operation, like the Newton was. (The Palm interface is great for really small devices, but for tablet-sized devices I think the Newton interface is much better.)
This paper
describes a filesystem (called S4) that keeps versions of every write(), up to some specified time window. You can mount a read-only version of the filesystem as it existed at any arbitrary time in the past (up to the size of the window). For a lot of people, they think several weeks would be a reasonable window.
I haven't read Spolsky's book, but from the review it sounds similar to a book I really liked, Programming as if People Mattered, by Nathaniel Borenstein. I definitely recommend it if you're interested in UI development.
That is, Snow Crash and Diamond Age are almost, but not quite, entirely unlike Cryptonomicon. I loved SC and DA and really looked forward to Cryptonomicon.
But then I started reading the free excerpt on the web. Whereas SC and DA both sucked me in within the first few pages, Cryptonomicon just bored me. So I am very sorry to hear that he's continuing in the style of it rather than his earlier works.
Useful review in that respect, though. I now know I need look at Quicksilver any further.:)
You're both right. Netscape was crappy compared to IE and it to Mozilla a long time to become as responsive and to have as clean a look-and-feel as IE.
Today, I agree that Mozilla is much better than IE (popup blocking being my single favorite reason, but here are lots of others).
Oh, and the other reason IE has such huge marketshare is, of course, that MS made it the default, and people really tend not to change defaults.
It must depend on the school and/or department you're in. I'm know a lot of computer science researchers at U.C. Berkeley and Carnegie Mellon and there are very few who refuse DoD money. I think if that's what they want to do, that's fine. For myself, I've see a lot of DoD-funded projects and they've all had substantial, non-military, Good(TM) appliations, as well as the military ones, so I don't have a problem with them.
Like others said, if you want to teach at a university or do research at a university or research lab, get a PhD. If you want to develop products, I think you're at the optimal level now.
I doubt that having a PhD per se is bad, but if you want to develop products it's not as useful as the real-world experience you could obtain with the time you'd spend getting the PhD.
I wanted to do research, so I got a PhD. For me, it was the right choice, but it's a lot of time and energy. I know people who got PhDs and went to work at startups or other companies, and didn't regret getting the PhD. But I also know people who stopped at the MS level and are really glad they did.
I love Unix, Linux, emacs, and lots of open source software. I use OpenOffice and Star Office. I really wanted to like the GIMP. But I found tried it a few different times and found it really frustrating. I have used Photoshop and it is *so* much easier and more intuitive.
I can't say which has more functionality because I was so frustrated with the GIMP that I didn't explore it further. If they rework the interface to make it easier to use, I may look at it again. Until then, I'll get by with xv and OO/SO, or copy files to a Windoze box and use PS.
If you want to see a big (no, really big) feat of non-computer engineering, I recommend the Hoover Dam. If it were built today I'd be impressed; the fact that it was built in the 1930s blows me away.
I know you asked for geeky things, but I can't resist recommending the Grand Canyon and Yosemite. Pictures of them are cool to look at, but you can't get the effect of being there except by being there. (BTW, the former is near Hoover Dam, and the latter is about 4 hours from the Bay Area.)
The law doesn't distinguish what something is 'primarily' used for.
IANAL, so although I think this is generally true, I'm not sure. What I am sure about is that this is not correct in copyright law: whether a device that can contribute to copright infringement is legal or not may depend on the degree to which its uses are infringing vs. non-infringing. It also depends on other factors, such as whether its use (will) deprive the copyright owner(s) of revenue. In the past, devices that have substantial non-infringing uses have been ruled to be ok, even if they also have infringing uses (perhaps most famously, VCRs).
I guess I wasn't as explicit as I should have been. What I meant was that Catholicism is not equivalent to Christianity, but is a subset (i.e., as you said, not all Christians are Catholic).
And clearly, not all scientists are Christians (in fact, most people in the world aren't Christians, so most sciencts probably most aren't). However, it seems to me that some people think Christianity and science are mutually exclusive, which is what I wanted to argue against.
I can understand why non-Christians might think the Catholic Church ==
Christianity, but I'd like to point out it's not so. There are many
Christians who aren't Catholic, and many Christians who believed in a
Copernician Universe long before the Pope agreed with it (such as
Copernicus, himself). Other famous Christian astronomers include
Johannes Kepler, Tycho Brahe, and Joseph Lagrange. For lists of other
famous Christian astronomers (and other scientists), check out these
links: Christian
astronomers, famous
Christians (or search Google yourself:) ).
Briefly, here's a few you might have heard of: Hertz, Pascal, Faraday, Kelvin, Pasteur,
Maxwell, and Mendel.
I recommend looking at Alice, an environment that's designed specifically to be an easy way for kids to learn to program. It's quite mature (started at least 7 years ago) and the developers have evaluated it with real kids. It's about programming in an interactive 3D world, which I think is a great environment for beginning programming. One of my early programming experiences was in LOGO, and I really liked being able to type commands and see an immediate effect.
From what I know of squeak, it sounds like a good environment, but AFAIK it wasn't designed specifically for kids.
If you mean that creators of copyrightable works are not obligated to create such works or obligated to share them with anyone if they do create them, then you're right.
However, if a creator does decide to create and then share a work, society is not, as a matter of principle, under any obligation to grant the creator a monopoly on the duplication and distribution of the work[1]. In the US, the Constitution allows (but doesn't require) Congress to grant creators limited monopolies for the express purpose of "promot[ing] science and the useful arts."[2]
After the monopoly expires, the creation reverts to its natural state of being in the public domain.
This is a social contract where the government agrees to give creators a limited monopoly, in the belief that this will encourage creators to create and share works. But the point is not (historically, at least) to allow creators to become wealthy; the point is to encourage the creation of works that (after a limited time) are available to, usable by, and which benefit everyone .
[1] This all applies to the United States. Principles of copyright may differ in your country.
[2] In more detail, "The Congress shall have power... 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." Source.
Hyperion was recommended to me by a friend who usually has pretty good taste, so I expected to enjoy it, but I was really disappointed. I didn't find the characters very compelling and I also found the ending very unsatisfying.
The Wheel of Time starts out very promising, but it drags on and on. I read the first 5 or so and decided nothing would ever actually be resolved so I gave up.
A *much* better current fantasy series is George R. R. Martin's "Song of Ice and Fire". The first 3 books are out as of now: "A Game of Thrones", "A Clash of Kings", and "A Storm of Swords." It's about political mechanications among the noble houses of a medieval-tech-level fantasy kingdom. Its intricacies remind me of Dune. One thing I really like is that it's one of the most suspenseful sci-fi/fantasy books I've read because the author lets really bad things happen to major characters. Some might find it a bit grim or depressing because of that, but I think that's a great feature (at least for a change).
Slashdot Mirror
I tried to use The GIMP a few times and was profoundly frustrated. I found Photoshop much easier to learn. I can't say how they compare for expert users, because I don't know The GIMP and am only moderately advanced with Photoshop.
Although I happen to agree with the first sentence, the idea that "anything else" that someone has never used is automatically difficult to use is ridiculous. People use lots of things every day that they've never seen before quite well. Most of these things are not as complex as The GIMP or Photoshop, but what a lot of people want to do with The GIMP or Photoshop isn't that complex, either.
Things can be designed to be easy to use for first-time use (ATMs should be this way). They can also be designed to work really well for experts (I like emacs because of this). It is often difficult to do both in the same interface/device.
It may be better now, but it used to be a huge pain in Tcl to get things to evaluate in the context you wanted, because it doesn't have lambdas/closures. The "everything is a string" approach works ok for small programs and makes the learning curve shallow, but I found I hit a ceiling really fast. The only good thing about Tcl is that it comes with Tk, but since Tk is accessible from other languages, like Python and Perl, I'm happy to avoid Tcl.
YMMV, of course, but I prefer a language with real control structures and data types.
That's a great idea, but the pay is pretty bad. I'd be willing to work there for somewhat less than I'd make in industry, but I looked into working there, and I'd be making a lot less: 30-40% less. And the DC area isn't exactly inexpensive to live in. I have a PhD, so maybe I'm overqualified/educated, but they really ought to have a few PhDs there and it's going to be hard to attract good ones with those wages.
Yea, verily, if you enjoy CRPGs *at all* it is nigh a moral imperative that you go forthwith and purchase Planescape: Torment.
Neither better NPC interaction nor a more compelling story are to be had anywhere.
Favorite Nordom lines:
"Attention: Morte! Are you aware that I have six sides?"
"I estimate Fall-from-Grace to be found attractive by the male sex of over 321423 separate species. Give or take 5."
I disagree that the Newton failed due to poor usability. I think it was two other reasons: it was too expensive and it was the wrong size. I used one for years, and found it too big to carry everywhere, yet too small to take as many notes on as my 8.5x11" paper notebook (or even my steno pad).
So now I carry a Palm everywhere, for calendar, phone book, and quick notes, and take a steno pad to meetings, seminars, etc. Actually, I often take my laptop to meetings, too, in case they're boring. I'd love to be able to take a tablet-sized computer, instead, but I want one that was designed for pen-based operation, like the Newton was. (The Palm interface is great for really small devices, but for tablet-sized devices I think the Newton interface is much better.)
This paper describes a filesystem (called S4) that keeps versions of every write(), up to some specified time window. You can mount a read-only version of the filesystem as it existed at any arbitrary time in the past (up to the size of the window). For a lot of people, they think several weeks would be a reasonable window.
I haven't read Spolsky's book, but from the review it sounds similar to a book I really liked, Programming as if People Mattered, by Nathaniel Borenstein. I definitely recommend it if you're interested in UI development.
That is, Snow Crash and Diamond Age are almost, but not quite, entirely unlike Cryptonomicon. I loved SC and DA and really looked forward to Cryptonomicon.
:)
But then I started reading the free excerpt on the web. Whereas SC and DA both sucked me in within the first few pages, Cryptonomicon just bored me. So I am very sorry to hear that he's continuing in the style of it rather than his earlier works.
Useful review in that respect, though. I now know I need look at Quicksilver any further.
Today, I agree that Mozilla is much better than IE (popup blocking being my single favorite reason, but here are lots of others).
Oh, and the other reason IE has such huge marketshare is, of course, that MS made it the default, and people really tend not to change defaults.
It must depend on the school and/or department you're in. I'm know a lot of computer science researchers at U.C. Berkeley and Carnegie Mellon and there are very few who refuse DoD money. I think if that's what they want to do, that's fine. For myself, I've see a lot of DoD-funded projects and they've all had substantial, non-military, Good(TM) appliations, as well as the military ones, so I don't have a problem with them.
Hey, I was reading /. at the time, which puts one in a certain state of mind. :)
I thought about changing it, but decided it was appropriate for this audience.
I was disturbed and amused by a warning on the stick form factor of Crisco: "Not to be used as a spread."
Ewww.
Like others said, if you want to teach at a university or do research at a university or research lab, get a PhD. If you want to develop products, I think you're at the optimal level now.
I doubt that having a PhD per se is bad, but if you want to develop products it's not as useful as the real-world experience you could obtain with the time you'd spend getting the PhD.
I wanted to do research, so I got a PhD. For me, it was the right choice, but it's a lot of time and energy. I know people who got PhDs and went to work at startups or other companies, and didn't regret getting the PhD. But I also know people who stopped at the MS level and are really glad they did.
I love Unix, Linux, emacs, and lots of open source software. I use OpenOffice and Star Office. I really wanted to like the GIMP. But I found tried it a few different times and found it really frustrating. I have used Photoshop and it is *so* much easier and more intuitive.
I can't say which has more functionality because I was so frustrated with the GIMP that I didn't explore it further. If they rework the interface to make it easier to use, I may look at it again. Until then, I'll get by with xv and OO/SO, or copy files to a Windoze box and use PS.
I know you asked for geeky things, but I can't resist recommending the Grand Canyon and Yosemite. Pictures of them are cool to look at, but you can't get the effect of being there except by being there. (BTW, the former is near Hoover Dam, and the latter is about 4 hours from the Bay Area.)
This story is about researchers from the University of California at Berkeley (a.k.a. U.C. Berkeley or Cal), not the University of Berkley.
IANAL, so although I think this is generally true, I'm not sure. What I am sure about is that this is not correct in copyright law: whether a device that can contribute to copright infringement is legal or not may depend on the degree to which its uses are infringing vs. non-infringing. It also depends on other factors, such as whether its use (will) deprive the copyright owner(s) of revenue. In the past, devices that have substantial non-infringing uses have been ruled to be ok, even if they also have infringing uses (perhaps most famously, VCRs).
And clearly, not all scientists are Christians (in fact, most people in the world aren't Christians, so most sciencts probably most aren't). However, it seems to me that some people think Christianity and science are mutually exclusive, which is what I wanted to argue against.
Briefly, here's a few you might have heard of: Hertz, Pascal, Faraday, Kelvin, Pasteur, Maxwell, and Mendel.
From what I know of squeak, it sounds like a good environment, but AFAIK it wasn't designed specifically for kids.
If you mean that creators of copyrightable works are not obligated to create such works or obligated to share them with anyone if they do create them, then you're right.
However, if a creator does decide to create and then share a work, society is not, as a matter of principle, under any obligation to grant the creator a monopoly on the duplication and distribution of the work[1]. In the US, the Constitution allows (but doesn't require) Congress to grant creators limited monopolies for the express purpose of "promot[ing] science and the useful arts."[2] After the monopoly expires, the creation reverts to its natural state of being in the public domain.
This is a social contract where the government agrees to give creators a limited monopoly, in the belief that this will encourage creators to create and share works. But the point is not (historically, at least) to allow creators to become wealthy; the point is to encourage the creation of works that (after a limited time) are available to, usable by, and which benefit everyone .
[1] This all applies to the United States. Principles of copyright may differ in your country.
[2] In more detail, "The Congress shall have power... 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." Source.
Hyperion was recommended to me by a friend who usually has pretty good taste, so I expected to enjoy it, but I was really disappointed. I didn't find the characters very compelling and I also found the ending very unsatisfying.
The Wheel of Time starts out very promising, but it drags on and on. I read the first 5 or so and decided nothing would ever actually be resolved so I gave up.
A *much* better current fantasy series is George R. R. Martin's "Song of Ice and Fire". The first 3 books are out as of now: "A Game of Thrones", "A Clash of Kings", and "A Storm of Swords." It's about political mechanications among the noble houses of a medieval-tech-level fantasy kingdom. Its intricacies remind me of Dune. One thing I really like is that it's one of the most suspenseful sci-fi/fantasy books I've read because the author lets really bad things happen to major characters. Some might find it a bit grim or depressing because of that, but I think that's a great feature (at least for a change).
I hate the language because: no inheritance, having to "Set" object assignments, and terrible namespace management.
The IDE has lots of obnoxious problems, but I'll just list my favorite here: You can't save a file if it has a compile-time error in it.