Actually, friction isn't even the issue. It's entirely possible to create a perpetual motion DEVICE, if you eliminate friction. You put some initial energy in, then it runs forever. But you can't make a perpetual motion MACHINE- one in which you get more energy out than you put in.
If there's ANY justice to be found in the universe, there's *gotta* be a special 8th circle of Hell that is reserved exclusively for these people. Let me guess, they work a weekend job as a telemarketer too?
.. stop putting on your mascara eating a bagle talking on your cell phone to your wife
You're absolutely right, I see a lot of Californian drivers who put on mascara while talking to their wives. The closer to San Francisco you get, the worser it is!
Right. There's a big difference between a road race Vette and Ford Explorer when it comes to handling ability. I routinely take curves well above the speed rating, and I drive a beat up 84 Chevy pickup. No thanks, I'll do without.
What was that 90s movie where the cop gets cryogenically frozen then brought back to life in the future? I remember a scene where there's devices on the wall that printed out a ticket every time he cursed. Wow, that's the America *I* want to live in...
I'll just build a device that emits enough RF energy at the right frequency to destroy RFID tags. Maybe I'll have one large device in my trunk running off the car's electrical system, that can put out enough wattage to destroy devices in a large radius, and a second hand-held device that I can carry on my person at all times.
Then, I will make it my business to destroy every RFID tag I come near. I'll also do my best to proliferate these devices across the planet (sell plans, sell devices on the black market, etc) so that others can do the same.
Can you imagine the damage just 20 or 30 people with the high-power devices hidden in their cars could do?
Agreed, 100%. Web hosting is DIRT CHEAP. Hell, I'm an unemployed college student and I can afford the $8 per month to operate my site (which has 8 gigs of traffic and 200 megs of space- PLENTY enough for the vast majority of those sites that whine about needing popup ads and banners for revenue). If you can't afford $8 per month....
YOU ARE A CHEAP BASTARD.
If you can't afford $8 per month, you don't need to be running a web site. Period.
And don't complain about domain registration, either. I got my.us domain for like $10.
Actually, the most likely scenario is that you're going to have to either sign it or find another job, period. It's not going to be conditional, it's going to be mandatory.
And if even if the scenario occured where you were unfairly discriminated against because you didn't agree to your email being monitored, that's what LAWYERS are actually good for.
[I]It isn't consent if there's no real choice.[/I]
Actually, it is. If you don't like it you can always go work somewhere else. How is that "no real choice"?
I don't foresee GNOME switching over to Eiffel any time soon, but I would love to see someone write an Eiffel GNOME API.
I started messing around with Eiffel some time ago and I love it. I can't get enough of it. C++ is really a piss poor language in comparison. Now that I've gotten used to the cleanliness and simplicity of Eiffel, every time I see C++ source code I get a sick feeling in my stomach. Really, it's amazing to look back at this crap you had put up with for years and realize just how bad it is.
About the best analogy I can think of is this: It's like having a three-bay garage full of Snap-On tools, two and four post lifts, overhead motorized trolleys with electric winches, air conditioning, etc after you've spent years changing transmissions and doing major work outside on the ground with only the most rudimentary, cheap Chinese tools.
Now I know I'm gonna get flamed for these views, but I don't care. Out of all the people who disagree with me I'm sure only a few have actually taken time to learn and use Eiffel.
Yes, Eiffel lacks some features that it needs. One major example is dynamic library loading, which is totally non-existent in Eiffel at the moment. You can of course interface your Eiffel code to external C routines that load and use whatever C libraries you want, but you currently can't build and load Eiffel dynamic libraries. I am confident this need will be addressed in a forthcoming Eiffel standard.
Yes, Eiffel is a free and open standard. It is developed by the NICE group. One poster made the good point that the core libraries are different between the various implementations of Eiffel. This is true. However, the only Eiffel implementations really worth mentioning are a) SmartEiffel, the free GNU implementation, and b) ISE EiffelStudio, which is a really freakin awesome development environment, but is not free and costs mega $$$$.
As a language, Eiffel is clean, simple, and POWERFUL. The inheritance facility (both single and multiple) is top shelf stuff, far more clean and powerful than C++ or Java. Same goes for the type system, the syntax, etc.
Eiffel also supports and encourages a type of programming known as "design by contract"- basically, each class and feature (method) has a specifically stated contract it must fulfill. Suffice to say this method when properly used *will* result in a program that is not only far less buggy, but whose bugs are easier to catch and take care of.
IMO, one of the biggest problems with C++ programmers switching to Eiffel is that they instinctively write programs with C++ design and Eiffel syntax. When steel was invented, engineers didn't design steel replicas of wooden bridges, they came up with all new designs to take advantage of the better properties of steel. Same thing with Eiffel. It's easy to learn the syntax, but it takes a while to totally get used to Eiffel in a way that lets you take full advantage of its unique features to produce the best quality software possible. Trust me, when you get to this stage, you will not go back to C++.
I highly recommend the book "Object Oriented Software Construction 2nd Edition" by Bertrand Meyer. It is *the* definitive book on object-oriented programming. It extensively uses Eiffel as its notation, but the concepts introduced can be applied to C++ or Java or any other OO language to help create better software. Be warned, it's very verbose in a lot of areas, and some of the stuff is really dry and will put you to sleep. I recommend skipping past certain stuff like abstract data type theory, mathematical proofs of software correctness, and similarly intriguing subjects.
Care to back up your statements? I happen to think the Eiffel great type system and its awesome implementation of multiple inheritance are strong selling points, not weaknesses.
Wow, sounds good in theory. But wait- what happens when this red light is at the bottom of a hill, and an out-of-control semi truck carrying hazardous chemicals flies through, brakes smoking, and hits this spike strip? I would pay good money to see the carnage that would follow.
Exactly right. Why change something when it works?
Example: The U.S. military.
How many of you pimply-faced 16 year olds ever heard of the Kermit file transfer protocol? It was invented in '81 as a highly reliable way to send data without error. The U.S. military still uses this protocol to send data over *110 BPS* (yes, that's right, 110 bits per second) connections in highly critical applications because it is absolutely bulletproof.
They could just as easily trash all that stuff and use some new-fangled suitcase-sized satellite terminal to transfer the same data at several MBPS. But what happens when there's a glitch in the system, or the system goes down? Congrats, the Patriot missiles don't fire, and a nuke just landed on your mom's house because our government went for eye candy rather than predictability reliability.
There are countless other examples of this in the military. How about the B-52 bomber? It's been in constant use since the *50s* (with numerous upgrades of course). Ever once in a while I hear some ignorant person wonder why we don't scrap the B-52. The answer is that it does a job that no other bomber can do, and does it well, and most importantly, it does it *reliably*. It's a *proven* technology. There's no *benefit* to trying to build a new bomber to take its place. It has been constantly refined over the years, and its limitations and abilities are well-known.
You can easily see how this applies to the subject at hand. RS-232, parallel ports, etc are all proven technologies that have lasted for decades and performed their jobs reliably and predictably. Exactly what's the rush to swap over to some brand spankin new technology just because it's new?
Sure, USB 2.0 is a nice standard. Great. But don't expect everyone to ditch what they've got just because something new shows up on the block.
These must be the same people who spend thousands of dollars doing "case mods" and installing neon lights and other useless things. The same people who, in another life, would spend half their life in the mall buying new clothes because their old clothes are "SO five minutes ago".
Ok, that's understandable. What I was trying to say is, would be better off sticking with gasoline even as the prices rise up much higher, or doing an expensive conversion to ethanol (not hard to do, but most people can't do this themselves), a fuel which may turn out to be more expensive than gasoline when you consider subsidies and such, and other issues?
I think the future lies with fuels like bio-diesel. It's not real expensive to produce and it works pretty well. Personally I will continue driving gas-burning cars until the day I die, because I love them. But if gas gets too expensive I may just have to relegate them to weekend/night cruisers and drive a diesel car fueled with bio-diesel to work.
Look at the statistics more closely. Sure, if you're looking at the population as a whole, "only" 25% live in rural areas (that's still a HUGE number of people). But look at the individual states and you will see tons of states where 30, 40, 50, and even 60% of the population live in rural areas.
Welcome to America, the land where the vast majority of the population does *not* live in huge cities. Welcome to America, the land where huge numbers of people live 10-20+ miles away from town out in the boondocks, on dirt roads. Hell there are people living 50+ miles away from the nearest town.
I could spend days ripping apart your ideas because they're so ridiculous and naive, but I'll just let you go with a word of advice: Get out of the city and explore. Maybe you'll see exactly why private transportation will never go away.
Then you've got people like me. My yard is 90 acres and includes woods, streams, fields, wildlife, etc. One reason I couldn't live in the suburbs is the same reason I couldn't drive a Camry- it gets old the 5th time you can't figure out which silver Camry is yours in the parking lot.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, friction isn't even the issue. It's entirely possible to create a perpetual motion DEVICE, if you eliminate friction. You put some initial energy in, then it runs forever. But you can't make a perpetual motion MACHINE- one in which you get more energy out than you put in.
They're spammers AND lawyers?
If there's ANY justice to be found in the universe, there's *gotta* be a special 8th circle of Hell that is reserved exclusively for these people. Let me guess, they work a weekend job as a telemarketer too?
It's "frist post", you insensitive clod. Learn how to spell!
You're absolutely right, I see a lot of Californian drivers who put on mascara while talking to their wives. The closer to San Francisco you get, the worser it is!
Right. There's a big difference between a road race Vette and Ford Explorer when it comes to handling ability. I routinely take curves well above the speed rating, and I drive a beat up 84 Chevy pickup. No thanks, I'll do without.
What was that 90s movie where the cop gets cryogenically frozen then brought back to life in the future? I remember a scene where there's devices on the wall that printed out a ticket every time he cursed. Wow, that's the America *I* want to live in...
I'll just build a device that emits enough RF energy at the right frequency to destroy RFID tags. Maybe I'll have one large device in my trunk running off the car's electrical system, that can put out enough wattage to destroy devices in a large radius, and a second hand-held device that I can carry on my person at all times.
Then, I will make it my business to destroy every RFID tag I come near. I'll also do my best to proliferate these devices across the planet (sell plans, sell devices on the black market, etc) so that others can do the same.
Can you imagine the damage just 20 or 30 people with the high-power devices hidden in their cars could do?
Agreed, 100%. Web hosting is DIRT CHEAP. Hell, I'm an unemployed college student and I can afford the $8 per month to operate my site (which has 8 gigs of traffic and 200 megs of space- PLENTY enough for the vast majority of those sites that whine about needing popup ads and banners for revenue). If you can't afford $8 per month....
.us domain for like $10.
YOU ARE A CHEAP BASTARD.
If you can't afford $8 per month, you don't need to be running a web site. Period.
And don't complain about domain registration, either. I got my
Actually, the most likely scenario is that you're going to have to either sign it or find another job, period. It's not going to be conditional, it's going to be mandatory.
And if even if the scenario occured where you were unfairly discriminated against because you didn't agree to your email being monitored, that's what LAWYERS are actually good for.
[I]It isn't consent if there's no real choice.[/I]
Actually, it is. If you don't like it you can always go work somewhere else. How is that "no real choice"?
FUD. This law requires that both parties consent to monitoring. That's what an employee agreement is- a documented form of consent.
... the guy who's getting paid hundreds of millions of dollars.
The Sidewinder is a primitive AIR TO AIR missile. A Hellfire (air to GROUND) missile is what you want.
I don't foresee GNOME switching over to Eiffel any time soon, but I would love to see someone write an Eiffel GNOME API.
I started messing around with Eiffel some time ago and I love it. I can't get enough of it. C++ is really a piss poor language in comparison. Now that I've gotten used to the cleanliness and simplicity of Eiffel, every time I see C++ source code I get a sick feeling in my stomach. Really, it's amazing to look back at this crap you had put up with for years and realize just how bad it is.
About the best analogy I can think of is this: It's like having a three-bay garage full of Snap-On tools, two and four post lifts, overhead motorized trolleys with electric winches, air conditioning, etc after you've spent years changing transmissions and doing major work outside on the ground with only the most rudimentary, cheap Chinese tools.
Now I know I'm gonna get flamed for these views, but I don't care. Out of all the people who disagree with me I'm sure only a few have actually taken time to learn and use Eiffel.
Yes, Eiffel lacks some features that it needs. One major example is dynamic library loading, which is totally non-existent in Eiffel at the moment. You can of course interface your Eiffel code to external C routines that load and use whatever C libraries you want, but you currently can't build and load Eiffel dynamic libraries. I am confident this need will be addressed in a forthcoming Eiffel standard.
Yes, Eiffel is a free and open standard. It is developed by the NICE group. One poster made the good point that the core libraries are different between the various implementations of Eiffel. This is true. However, the only Eiffel implementations really worth mentioning are a) SmartEiffel, the free GNU implementation, and b) ISE EiffelStudio, which is a really freakin awesome development environment, but is not free and costs mega $$$$.
As a language, Eiffel is clean, simple, and POWERFUL. The inheritance facility (both single and multiple) is top shelf stuff, far more clean and powerful than C++ or Java. Same goes for the type system, the syntax, etc.
Eiffel also supports and encourages a type of programming known as "design by contract"- basically, each class and feature (method) has a specifically stated contract it must fulfill. Suffice to say this method when properly used *will* result in a program that is not only far less buggy, but whose bugs are easier to catch and take care of.
IMO, one of the biggest problems with C++ programmers switching to Eiffel is that they instinctively write programs with C++ design and Eiffel syntax. When steel was invented, engineers didn't design steel replicas of wooden bridges, they came up with all new designs to take advantage of the better properties of steel. Same thing with Eiffel. It's easy to learn the syntax, but it takes a while to totally get used to Eiffel in a way that lets you take full advantage of its unique features to produce the best quality software possible. Trust me, when you get to this stage, you will not go back to C++.
I highly recommend the book "Object Oriented Software Construction 2nd Edition" by Bertrand Meyer. It is *the* definitive book on object-oriented programming. It extensively uses Eiffel as its notation, but the concepts introduced can be applied to C++ or Java or any other OO language to help create better software. Be warned, it's very verbose in a lot of areas, and some of the stuff is really dry and will put you to sleep. I recommend skipping past certain stuff like abstract data type theory, mathematical proofs of software correctness, and similarly intriguing subjects.
Care to back up your statements? I happen to think the Eiffel great type system and its awesome implementation of multiple inheritance are strong selling points, not weaknesses.
Where can I find a $30k Porsche Boxster S?
Wow, sounds good in theory. But wait- what happens when this red light is at the bottom of a hill, and an out-of-control semi truck carrying hazardous chemicals flies through, brakes smoking, and hits this spike strip? I would pay good money to see the carnage that would follow.
One website I found says the Canadian government billed the Soviets for $6 million (Canadian, 1978) dollars.
What's that, like $97 USD?
Exactly right. Why change something when it works?
Example: The U.S. military.
How many of you pimply-faced 16 year olds ever heard of the Kermit file transfer protocol? It was invented in '81 as a highly reliable way to send data without error. The U.S. military still uses this protocol to send data over *110 BPS* (yes, that's right, 110 bits per second) connections in highly critical applications because it is absolutely bulletproof.
They could just as easily trash all that stuff and use some new-fangled suitcase-sized satellite terminal to transfer the same data at several MBPS. But what happens when there's a glitch in the system, or the system goes down? Congrats, the Patriot missiles don't fire, and a nuke just landed on your mom's house because our government went for eye candy rather than predictability reliability.
There are countless other examples of this in the military. How about the B-52 bomber? It's been in constant use since the *50s* (with numerous upgrades of course). Ever once in a while I hear some ignorant person wonder why we don't scrap the B-52. The answer is that it does a job that no other bomber can do, and does it well, and most importantly, it does it *reliably*. It's a *proven* technology. There's no *benefit* to trying to build a new bomber to take its place. It has been constantly refined over the years, and its limitations and abilities are well-known.
You can easily see how this applies to the subject at hand. RS-232, parallel ports, etc are all proven technologies that have lasted for decades and performed their jobs reliably and predictably. Exactly what's the rush to swap over to some brand spankin new technology just because it's new?
Sure, USB 2.0 is a nice standard. Great. But don't expect everyone to ditch what they've got just because something new shows up on the block.
These must be the same people who spend thousands of dollars doing "case mods" and installing neon lights and other useless things. The same people who, in another life, would spend half their life in the mall buying new clothes because their old clothes are "SO five minutes ago".
... until you get sued for violating the DMCA. ;)
Ok, that's understandable. What I was trying to say is, would be better off sticking with gasoline even as the prices rise up much higher, or doing an expensive conversion to ethanol (not hard to do, but most people can't do this themselves), a fuel which may turn out to be more expensive than gasoline when you consider subsidies and such, and other issues?
I think the future lies with fuels like bio-diesel. It's not real expensive to produce and it works pretty well. Personally I will continue driving gas-burning cars until the day I die, because I love them. But if gas gets too expensive I may just have to relegate them to weekend/night cruisers and drive a diesel car fueled with bio-diesel to work.
Okay, having done that, when are you going to work out the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?
African or European?
Look at the statistics more closely. Sure, if you're looking at the population as a whole, "only" 25% live in rural areas (that's still a HUGE number of people). But look at the individual states and you will see tons of states where 30, 40, 50, and even 60% of the population live in rural areas.
*cough cough* good shit man..
Welcome to America, the land where the vast majority of the population does *not* live in huge cities. Welcome to America, the land where huge numbers of people live 10-20+ miles away from town out in the boondocks, on dirt roads. Hell there are people living 50+ miles away from the nearest town.
I could spend days ripping apart your ideas because they're so ridiculous and naive, but I'll just let you go with a word of advice: Get out of the city and explore. Maybe you'll see exactly why private transportation will never go away.
Maybe in packed cities. Have you ever been to the country, where like 75% of America lives?
Then you've got people like me. My yard is 90 acres and includes woods, streams, fields, wildlife, etc. One reason I couldn't live in the suburbs is the same reason I couldn't drive a Camry- it gets old the 5th time you can't figure out which silver Camry is yours in the parking lot.