And you're not the first one to notice that. There's a significant concern that because Mac users aren't in the habit of virus paranoia that they are setting themselves up for a very, very big fall.
Evidence and rational thought have very little impact on people who think things like
"the only good germ is a dead germ"
"bright lights deter crime"
"second hand smoke is dangerous"
"criminals prefer machine guns"
in the end, people don't like scary and/or icky things and demand that "something" be done about them, even if "something" makes the problem worse instead of better.
I understand your annoyance - by the current definition of a "reproductively distinct population" the various races of man were different "species" until the advent of large scale immigration - which caused all these species to collapse into a single species.
But, at the same time, you can't really blame the scientists - it's not their fault that after centuries of carefully classifying creatures based on what they saw the creatures doing, DNA analysis comes along and throws it all out the window.
Not to mention sex drive and a lack of discrimination. I think the classic example is the "red wolf" - originally thought to be an extinct species it now turns out to be what you get when wolves and coyotes share the same range.
what I've seen on other very large projects. So much time is consumed with unit testing, making sure you don't introduce side effects, and studying existing code that the creation of new code slows to a crawl.
I worked on a project that had ~ 8 million lines of code. Code quality dropped so far we had to institute a weekly review - no one was allowed to commit a change until it had been reviewed by the entire team. It always pissed us all off to have to do it - but it turned out to be hugely effective at improving code quality, training new engineers in all the little details that never get written down, cross-training experienced engineers in portions of the code they hadn't worked on and, as a bonus, teaching us all how to write defensively and think about all the likely side effects of our changes.
You're looking at it from slightly the wrong direction.
From what I remember, lines of code per unit of time are language invariant. That is, an assembly language programmer will write the same number of debugged lines of code per day as a C programmer and as a Lisp programmer.
Thus, the drive to higher level languages is that you can do more with each line of code.
The downside is something you didn't directly mention - the need to master large libraries of code. Most of the examples in the Daily WTF are caused by people who didn't realize there was a library routine to do what they wanted, or didn't understand the features of the language they were using - not because they were trying to pump up the amount of code they produced.
Do you really think there was much demand for blacksmiths in the 1920's?
I hate to break it to you, but by 1920 we already had mass-market automobiles, tanks, fighter planes, the assembly line, mass-electrification and running water. The world, or at least American and Europe, was not populated by blacksmiths.
Most of those terms are brandnames and probably won't exist as words in another 20 years. The only really new word you used was "video" and maybe "google" if "google" continues down the road to being an actual word and not just slang.
Cameras shortly before then required the photographer to stick his head under a shroud and focus the image on a camera-obscura plate, then insert the wet-glass photographic plate.
By 1920, the Kodak brownie had been on the market for... twenty years. These cameras invented the concept of a fixed-focus point-and-shoot and used roll film. Glass plates were out of date by the 1890's.
In 1970, the world was full of science fiction books describing all sorts of instant communications techniques. Heck, in 1974 there was a popular book that described a universal computer network, hackers and computer worms/viruses. I remember, I was there.
You can go back to the 40's and 50's and find books describing a world run by networked computers.
the rabble who damage the message with the leaders who, through their emphasis on moral persuasion, convinced people to change despite their abhorrence of the rabble.
There's a reason we celebrate men like MLK and Ghandi while consigning others to a footnote of history.
And, finally, wasting your energy on something that actively hurts your cause is, in fact, worse than doing nothing at all.
Here's a hint: People who change the world are the people who persuade other people to agree with them. People who rant, rave, and demonize those who disagree with them simply ensure that what they want will never happen.
/Are you suggesting that it is impossible to sell public domain material?/
No, just that it's impossible to actually make money doing it.
Feel free to check the local mall and see how many copies of Dickens and Shakespeare you find, versus, say, Dan Brown.
Also, feel free to explain to me how much money Dan Brown would actually make if anyone who wanted to could sell copies of his books without giving him a cut.
Slashdot Mirror
And you're not the first one to notice that. There's a significant concern that because Mac users aren't in the habit of virus paranoia that they are setting themselves up for a very, very big fall.
Evidence and rational thought have very little impact on people who think things like
"the only good germ is a dead germ"
"bright lights deter crime"
"second hand smoke is dangerous"
"criminals prefer machine guns"
in the end, people don't like scary and/or icky things and demand that "something" be done about them, even if "something" makes the problem worse instead of better.
No, it's not called a vaccine. It's called training your immune system to distinguish between real pathogens and self.
Here's a hint:
What's the difference you ask? Well, which country insists on trying to exterminate every germ - harmless or beneficial - that crosses the border?
I would have thought anyone who survived highschool would have realized that the geeks were a different species.
genetics changed their understanding of the term.
I understand your annoyance - by the current definition of a "reproductively distinct population" the various races of man were different "species" until the advent of large scale immigration - which caused all these species to collapse into a single species.
But, at the same time, you can't really blame the scientists - it's not their fault that after centuries of carefully classifying creatures based on what they saw the creatures doing, DNA analysis comes along and throws it all out the window.
Not to mention sex drive and a lack of discrimination. I think the classic example is the "red wolf" - originally thought to be an extinct species it now turns out to be what you get when wolves and coyotes share the same range.
"implied italics"
/this/ is meant to be italic.
Here's a handy guide:
*THIS* is meant to be bold.
It comes from people who are used to posting on Scoop-based sites.
5000 / 6200 != 1 / 6.
what I've seen on other very large projects. So much time is consumed with unit testing, making sure you don't introduce side effects, and studying existing code that the creation of new code slows to a crawl.
I worked on a project that had ~ 8 million lines of code. Code quality dropped so far we had to institute a weekly review - no one was allowed to commit a change until it had been reviewed by the entire team. It always pissed us all off to have to do it - but it turned out to be hugely effective at improving code quality, training new engineers in all the little details that never get written down, cross-training experienced engineers in portions of the code they hadn't worked on and, as a bonus, teaching us all how to write defensively and think about all the likely side effects of our changes.
You're looking at it from slightly the wrong direction.
From what I remember, lines of code per unit of time are language invariant. That is, an assembly language programmer will write the same number of debugged lines of code per day as a C programmer and as a Lisp programmer.
Thus, the drive to higher level languages is that you can do more with each line of code.
The downside is something you didn't directly mention - the need to master large libraries of code. Most of the examples in the Daily WTF are caused by people who didn't realize there was a library routine to do what they wanted, or didn't understand the features of the language they were using - not because they were trying to pump up the amount of code they produced.
ROTFL - do you get much hate mail for that sig?
I was under the impression that the US creates more new companies each year than Europe.
Are you saying that's not correct?
Actually, I would suspect that the developing countries create more new companies each year than "other first world countries" do.
I wonder how many hits his site will get as people visit just to complain about the movie?
Actually, online gaming for the PSP follows the same model, although that obviously doesn't qualify as "prior art".
it's amazing, but copies of FFVII go for 80-100 USD these days...
the follow up isn't new either. The announcement about active duty personnel records being in the file was made at least a week ago.
Slashdot notices a month-old scandal.
Thieves steal personal data of 26.5M vets
Theft of Data Leads to Firings
Hrm.
I think you're overshooting a bit. Kodak introduced "dry plates" in 1880, roll film around 1890.
Someone else may have been there before them, I suppose.
Do you really think there was much demand for blacksmiths in the 1920's?
I hate to break it to you, but by 1920 we already had mass-market automobiles, tanks, fighter planes, the assembly line, mass-electrification and running water. The world, or at least American and Europe, was not populated by blacksmiths.
Most of those terms are brandnames and probably won't exist as words in another 20 years. The only really new word you used was "video" and maybe "google" if "google" continues down the road to being an actual word and not just slang.
Cameras shortly before then required the photographer to stick his head under a shroud and focus the image on a camera-obscura plate, then insert the wet-glass photographic plate.
By 1920, the Kodak brownie had been on the market for... twenty years. These cameras invented the concept of a fixed-focus point-and-shoot and used roll film. Glass plates were out of date by the 1890's.
Dude.
In 1970, the world was full of science fiction books describing all sorts of instant communications techniques. Heck, in 1974 there was a popular book that described a universal computer network, hackers and computer worms/viruses. I remember, I was there.
You can go back to the 40's and 50's and find books describing a world run by networked computers.
the rabble who damage the message with the leaders who, through their emphasis on moral persuasion, convinced people to change despite their abhorrence of the rabble.
There's a reason we celebrate men like MLK and Ghandi while consigning others to a footnote of history.
The companies that publish public domain books fully intend to realise a profit.
Yes, yes, they do. But I notice that you deliberately skipped over the point - which is that the creators of those books won't make a red cent.
These studies are called "elections".
Oh, and also "history".
And, finally, wasting your energy on something that actively hurts your cause is, in fact, worse than doing nothing at all.
Here's a hint: People who change the world are the people who persuade other people to agree with them. People who rant, rave, and demonize those who disagree with them simply ensure that what they want will never happen.
/Are you suggesting that it is impossible to sell public domain material?/
No, just that it's impossible to actually make money doing it.
Feel free to check the local mall and see how many copies of Dickens and Shakespeare you find, versus, say, Dan Brown.
Also, feel free to explain to me how much money Dan Brown would actually make if anyone who wanted to could sell copies of his books without giving him a cut.