That thing has a monitor. It isn't even close to what a 'personal server' would be. By definition, such a device cannot have a user interface of its own.
> How can I use a personal server on the train or the bus...
Same way as anywhere else: with whatever interface device is at hand. Likely a PDA-shaped thing on the bus, or maybe a lap-top-shaped thing. It depends on how you use the interface and how much you want to carry, I guess. Maybe you'll even borrow a device from the guy next to you.
Now if you had a PDA that could talk to this thing via bluetooth, we're almost there.
You then remove all external IO from laptops and PDA's, except for the blue tooth to talk to the server. The server then handles all communication with outside networks, such as the Internet. Then you turn your cell phone into a client device as well. You bassically turn yourself into a walking wireless network, with the personal server acting as your router.
Now, battery size becomes a non-issue for the interface devices (cell phone, PDA), and less of an issue for the server device because it's easier to carry a big battery on your belt than next to your ear. The bulky stuff moves to your hip or bag, and everything else gets smaller. Oops, now look, I've added bluetooth to my wrist watch and it plays MP3's (stored on the server). Any bluetooth device within 10 feet or so of you is now automatically connected to the internet (if you allow access, of course).
Next step: more wireless protocols on the server. When you come in range of a willing 802.11 network, you can piggy-back on that for Internet access and save battery life. If your buddy has a wireless server device in his car, you can piggy back on that, and charge your battery as well. You will always have Internet access available, your battery consumption will just vary as you move from access point to access point.
Sure, you can access the thing with a desktop computer too, thus giving your PDA a real interface. But that's just the beginning.
Unless you mean the source to whatever CGI scripts, etc. may have conspired to generate the HTML/J-script/etc. your browser is decoding. Since you have been sent the OUTPUT from those things, it would fall under the same category as a compiler, where producing a binary from GPL'd source does not give rights to the source for the compiler.
If it worked that way, then I'd have the source to Windows and perhaps even the Athlon it's running on.
Oh man, that rocked. I got halfway through the article and suddenly I was reminded of the Iraqi info minister and was going to post a joke about it. But why bother? Nice one:-)
The API you're (I assume) talking about is the Win32 interface. That has nothing to do with VMS, and little to do with NT for that matter. It is an expanded-improved-slightly-cleaner version of Win16 (which evolved from the pile of steaming poo that was Windows 1.0) that acts as a translation layer between Win32 apps and the NT kernel. I don't know the first thing about VMS, but I'd bet that if you look at the kernel interface, you'll start to see the similarity. The bits I've seen of it look nothing at all even close to the Win32 interface.
"Would you hire a convicted embezzler to keep track of your savings account?
Would you hire a rapist to babysit your daughter?"
The comparison isn't exactly fair. I'm undecided on this issue because to me it isn't anywhere so black and white. Embezzlers don't embezzle out of curiosity. Rapists certainly don't rape out of curiosity. I doubt that the urge to rape can be satisfied by babysitting, but the urge to crack can probably be satisfied by honest technical work. I should know, I not a cracker, but I am the sort of person that could be a cracker, and my urge for such things is fully satisfied by honest programming.
How well-versed on current, relevant technology do you think someone who spent the last 7 years of their life in prison and prohibited from touching a computer is?
I think you'd be hiring an ability, a tendancy, a talent, rather than the ability to resite facts. Being versed on current technology would qualify the average person to do security work no more than knowing the word "Canvas" qualifies me to be an artist. Any skills that a person of this kind needs to have, he can learn very quickly.
>> you don't want all the tool and part logic in the Worker...
Uh... We don't?
>> We don't want to simulate the real world
On the contrary, that is precisely what OOP is trying to do.
Besides, my example is not bases on the assumption that OOP models the real world. It's based on experience. Hammer.Pound() becomes restrictive and hard to maintain. As it turns out, the real world approach is just better.
So why does Hammer.Pound() make more sense than Nail.GetPounded()? Or Board.GetNailed()? None of them make sense, yet that's what OOP classes teach.
Generic programming has the right approach, such as the STL. You don't List.Sort(), you Sort(List). If you want pure OOP, Perhaps it would be better to have an Organizer class, and do Organizer::Sort(List) (you'd have to do that in Java or C#). It becomes more obvious when like objects have to interact. Which object does the work? How do you decide? You don't! You create another class to do the work: Copier::Append(List1.Begin(), List1.End(), List2), or even Comparer::CompareNoCase(String1, String2). This helps eliminate the SwissArmyKnife approach (like a string class that knows how to write itself to a socket or grep itself). It keeps things simple, modular, and flexible.
I think what this shows is that the procedural approach is just as valid as it ever was, and that it sure is nicer to work with once we have OOP to help us organize things logically.
The four pillars of the male heterosexual psyche: naked women, lingerie, lesbians, and James Bond.
What do lingerie and James Bond do for a hetersexual guy? You could boil that down to naked lesbians. And you missed beer. So the two pillars of the male heterosexual psyche are: naked lezbians and beer.
Now if only those two things could be made available at hardware stores. Excuse me while I drift off to my personal happy place.
Ever try to debug with your code scattered across several sheets of laser printer paper?
I tried it once but I couldn't find the buttons for setting breakpoints and such, and when I penciled in printf()'s, nothing seemed to happen. Did I miss something? Maybe I should have used fan-fold paper?
"Did you know that the entire U.S. electrical grid could be powered by less than 150,000 modern wind turbines?"
How many acres does it take to hold that many wind turbines? How many of them need to be running at capacity at one time to power the entire U.S. electrical grid? All of them? How many would we need to guarantee that 150000 were running strong at all times, and how many acres would THAT take?
Nowhere in the article are the words 'camcorder', 'grandma', 'arm', etc.
It wasn't designed to fit into a grandmother clock and it certainly doesn't use a camcorder. It uses an infared sensor to sense pendulum location and a 'piston' to modify pendulum swing, and it is being used to automate maintenance on large clocks in churches, etc. It can also set the clock ahead and back an hour for daylight savings time.
Gotta be the worst case of can't be bothered to RTFA I've ever seen.
Now, anyone who thinks it would be better to replace the clocks in Big Ben with some modern electronic thing... well... probably ought to be shot. This doesn't seem like a bad way to get those big clocks to operate a good long time without human intervention.
"Gosh, we were trying to create this "meme" that large global gatherings of communists, students, and people without jobs were some mysterious force known as a 'Second Superpower,'
Yeah that's the part that's getting to me too. It appears to me that the phrase was coined in a really stupid way, so it only seems inevitable that someone else would coin it in a way that actually seems to make some sense. Can't have that though.
As far as Google's involvement is concerned, where's the beef? Google is working as designed. Just because it links to stories in a way you don't happen to agree with, too stinking bad. Life's rough; get a helmet.
Yeah! Let's put the X server in kernel too while we're at it. NOT!
It seems to me that media services should either become embedded in the X protocol, or standardized as a sister protocol. The problem lies in the failure to properly standardize the protocols. The actual mixing can still be done in hardware when possible, but the applications should have a very standard way of writing to the sound stream and that it shouldn't be done in kernel. I'd rather write to $DISPLAY:$SOUND_PORT than to/dev/dsp or whatever. Try going the/dev/dsp route while using a remote X server (which is how I always access my Linux box). It might sound a little... distant.
So why do astronomers always compare the size of meteors to Volkswagen bugs?
If you compared them to the size of Texas, people would freak out. And it (hopefully) wouldn't be very accurate.
If you compared them to a Citroen, nobody (in the U.S. anyway) would know what you're talking about. Those who did wouldn't take it seriously.
If you compared them to the size of Oprah, reactions would be two exact oposites, polarized by gender.
If you compared them to the size of a Dung Beetle, nobody would much care. They might chuckle over the name though.
If you compared them to the size of a software bug, Bill Gates would just shrug and say "we're not supporting this meteor because it's badly designed".
If you compared them to an anthrax bug, somebody in the Bush family would start a "War on Celestial Bodies" and it would the only thing considered news worthy for six straight months.
Slashdot Mirror
That thing has a monitor. It isn't even close to what a 'personal server' would be. By definition, such a device cannot have a user interface of its own.
> How can I use a personal server on the train or the bus...
Same way as anywhere else: with whatever interface device is at hand. Likely a PDA-shaped thing on the bus, or maybe a lap-top-shaped thing. It depends on how you use the interface and how much you want to carry, I guess. Maybe you'll even borrow a device from the guy next to you.
Now if you had a PDA that could talk to this thing via bluetooth, we're almost there.
You then remove all external IO from laptops and PDA's, except for the blue tooth to talk to the server. The server then handles all communication with outside networks, such as the Internet. Then you turn your cell phone into a client device as well. You bassically turn yourself into a walking wireless network, with the personal server acting as your router.
Now, battery size becomes a non-issue for the interface devices (cell phone, PDA), and less of an issue for the server device because it's easier to carry a big battery on your belt than next to your ear. The bulky stuff moves to your hip or bag, and everything else gets smaller. Oops, now look, I've added bluetooth to my wrist watch and it plays MP3's (stored on the server). Any bluetooth device within 10 feet or so of you is now automatically connected to the internet (if you allow access, of course).
Next step: more wireless protocols on the server. When you come in range of a willing 802.11 network, you can piggy-back on that for Internet access and save battery life. If your buddy has a wireless server device in his car, you can piggy back on that, and charge your battery as well. You will always have Internet access available, your battery consumption will just vary as you move from access point to access point.
Sure, you can access the thing with a desktop computer too, thus giving your PDA a real interface. But that's just the beginning.
what will they be called when introduced into the U.S.?
o m?
iCrapper?
iShitter?
iJohn?
iHead?
iPowderRo
iFacilities?
What would Beavis and Butthead say about this? What will Cartman say? What will Letterman say?
And now for the obligitory one-liner:
Gives a whole new meaning to the term "core dump" doesn't it? Sorry.
There would be a new world record on the books: The highest number of utterances of the word "porn" in a given area in a given time span.
It can only go on so long though, before you begin to hear nothing but "ewwwwwww!"
But not normal people. Only perverts view porn.
Hit the old View Source button and there you go.
Unless you mean the source to whatever CGI scripts, etc. may have conspired to generate the HTML/J-script/etc. your browser is decoding. Since you have been sent the OUTPUT from those things, it would fall under the same category as a compiler, where producing a binary from GPL'd source does not give rights to the source for the compiler.
If it worked that way, then I'd have the source to Windows and perhaps even the Athlon it's running on.
I hate spam just as much as the next guy, but I'd rather live with spam than watch GW start another 'war'. And I feel it coming. Ugh.
But who knows, maybe North Korea will be 'liberated' this time around.
Oh man, that rocked. I got halfway through the article and suddenly I was reminded of the Iraqi info minister and was going to post a joke about it. But why bother? Nice one :-)
The API you're (I assume) talking about is the Win32 interface. That has nothing to do with VMS, and little to do with NT for that matter. It is an expanded-improved-slightly-cleaner version of Win16 (which evolved from the pile of steaming poo that was Windows 1.0) that acts as a translation layer between Win32 apps and the NT kernel. I don't know the first thing about VMS, but I'd bet that if you look at the kernel interface, you'll start to see the similarity. The bits I've seen of it look nothing at all even close to the Win32 interface.
>> "Microsoft does work permitting that you have money"
EVERYTHING works permitting you have enough money. Enough money would get Toyota to write custom software. So what?
I stopped at the above quote. So much for objectivity. I think the author needs to get laid.
>> you don't want all the tool and part logic in the Worker...
Uh... We don't?
>> We don't want to simulate the real world
On the contrary, that is precisely what OOP is trying to do.
Besides, my example is not bases on the assumption that OOP models the real world. It's based on experience. Hammer.Pound() becomes restrictive and hard to maintain. As it turns out, the real world approach is just better.
So why does Hammer.Pound() make more sense than Nail.GetPounded()? Or Board.GetNailed()? None of them make sense, yet that's what OOP classes teach.
Generic programming has the right approach, such as the STL. You don't List.Sort(), you Sort(List). If you want pure OOP, Perhaps it would be better to have an Organizer class, and do Organizer::Sort(List) (you'd have to do that in Java or C#). It becomes more obvious when like objects have to interact. Which object does the work? How do you decide? You don't! You create another class to do the work: Copier::Append(List1.Begin(), List1.End(), List2), or even Comparer::CompareNoCase(String1, String2). This helps eliminate the SwissArmyKnife approach (like a string class that knows how to write itself to a socket or grep itself). It keeps things simple, modular, and flexible.
I think what this shows is that the procedural approach is just as valid as it ever was, and that it sure is nicer to work with once we have OOP to help us organize things logically.
Hammers pound? I don't think so. Hammers don't do anything.
You soon learn that it should be:
Worker.UseTool(Hammer, Nail);
Then you realize that OOP is just a nice way to organize things, and that it's all just a prettier procedural anyway.
"Just as I suspected. I'm surrounded by Assholes!"
Speed would depend on the size of the van. Driving distance would cause latency. Packet loss would be determined by the number of flat tires :-)
You'd better be careful. Under the patriot act this sort of abuse could be linked to terrorism. You don't want to be disapeared, do you?
Now if only those two things could be made available at hardware stores. Excuse me while I drift off to my personal happy place.
Doesn't anyone read the friggin articles?
Nowhere in the article are the words 'camcorder', 'grandma', 'arm', etc.
It wasn't designed to fit into a grandmother clock and it certainly doesn't use a camcorder. It uses an infared sensor to sense pendulum location and a 'piston' to modify pendulum swing, and it is being used to automate maintenance on large clocks in churches, etc. It can also set the clock ahead and back an hour for daylight savings time.
Gotta be the worst case of can't be bothered to RTFA I've ever seen.
Now, anyone who thinks it would be better to replace the clocks in Big Ben with some modern electronic thing... well... probably ought to be shot. This doesn't seem like a bad way to get those big clocks to operate a good long time without human intervention.
As far as Google's involvement is concerned, where's the beef? Google is working as designed. Just because it links to stories in a way you don't happen to agree with, too stinking bad. Life's rough; get a helmet.
Yeah! Let's put the X server in kernel too while we're at it. NOT!
/dev/dsp or whatever. Try going the /dev/dsp route while using a remote X server (which is how I always access my Linux box). It might sound a little... distant.
It seems to me that media services should either become embedded in the X protocol, or standardized as a sister protocol. The problem lies in the failure to properly standardize the protocols. The actual mixing can still be done in hardware when possible, but the applications should have a very standard way of writing to the sound stream and that it shouldn't be done in kernel. I'd rather write to $DISPLAY:$SOUND_PORT than to
If you compared them to a Citroen, nobody (in the U.S. anyway) would know what you're talking about. Those who did wouldn't take it seriously.
If you compared them to the size of Oprah, reactions would be two exact oposites, polarized by gender.
If you compared them to the size of a Dung Beetle, nobody would much care. They might chuckle over the name though.
If you compared them to the size of a software bug, Bill Gates would just shrug and say "we're not supporting this meteor because it's badly designed".
If you compared them to an anthrax bug, somebody in the Bush family would start a "War on Celestial Bodies" and it would the only thing considered news worthy for six straight months.