Re:How they manage it still has them puzzled...
on
Camouflage in Motion
·
· Score: 1
No that doesn't work. Imagine a line segment AB with A = prey and B = some object. Now imagine that A is constantly moving around. The dragonfly must keep itself on this line despite the prey's motion, and despite the dragonfly's wanting to get closer to the prey. It's not trivial.
(BTW, I have seen a lot of irrelevant replies to your post. One says something about the swivelling of the prey's eyeballs. Yikes; get a clue.)
Dilution? Bullshit. That is the meaning. Any text tranformable into a give program by another program is source code. QED.
Methinks you don't know what QED means.
Regardless, if you want to go on thinking a hex dump of Internet Explorer counts as its "source code", then more power to you, but don't be surprised if you find other people using a more practical definition of the term.
Assembly doesn't have a 1-1 mapping to machine code. There are macros, labels, comments, data declarations, branch optimizations, syntax (intel vs. at&t) etc, etc, etc. There's no reason to believe that a disassembly is equivalent to the source code in any important way except that it assembles to the same binary.
They are publishing source code for the virus. It IS the same thing. It may not be the ORIGINAL source but it is the source for the virus.
Well, if you believe the GPL, then "source code" is "the preferred form of the work for
making modifications to it". Or, if you believe FOLDOC, it's "the form in which a computer program is written by the programmer." Either way, a disassembly is not the source code.
To claim any text transformable into a given program is that program's "source code" dilutes the meaning of the term to the point of uselessness.
I did miss the hardening angle, though I find it hard to imagine that the leading edges of the orbiter could possibly be hard enough to withstand impacts the size of a paint-fleck in orbit.
That's why he's asking about paperwork and policies. If they sign a contract saying they don't own certain kinds of code, then that can supersede the "work for hire" copyright issue.
You're talking about a fleck of paint in orbit. They're talking about foam falling off the tank at launch. They are two different things.
If the shuttle got hit with a fleck of paint during launch, nobody would notice. If the shuttle got hit with a piece of foam in orbit, I think it would likely be destroyed.
The Energizer Bunny started in 1989 as a good parody of existing commercials. However, it has overstayed its welcome, and for about 12 years, it has been an eyesore and an embarrasment to Energizer.
From their website:
A pink bunny playing a drum and wearing shades and blue sandals has got to be cool. And the Energizer Bunny® is cool.
How to you respond to such a preposterously nerdy statement? It just reeks of middle-aged white guys in business suits trying to be "hip".
Um.... what's programming doing on that list? IME, unless you're compiling a huge swath of code all at once (which is extremely rare in the real world), effective programming can be still be done with, oh, say, a p2 350 w/ 32MB.
Nonsense. Every time I run "make" at work on my 1.5GHz Opteron, it takes about 20 seconds to compile my changes and link the binary, using nearly 100% CPU the whole time. If that were 10 seconds, I'd be happier. If it were 2 seconds, I'd be happier still. That means I'm interested in at least a 15GHz CPU before I stop appreciating the improvement.
If you're happy with your P2, then good for you, but don't assume everyone would be happy with your P2. (At home I have a dual Celeron-400 which suits me just fine.)
Oh good grief. Someone says this every time CPU speeds are mentioned. How you ever got to +5 Informative I'll never know.
So, Mr. Smarty Pants, suppose you're trying to evaluate different CPU architectures to decide which one will give the most bang for the buck. How exactly would you evaluate them for performance without benchmarks?
But if it's increasing exponentially, there's no need to start it at $100 at year 15. It can start at just $1 at year 15, and you'd still hit your every dollar mark 35 years later.
Slashdot Mirror
(BTW, I have seen a lot of irrelevant replies to your post. One says something about the swivelling of the prey's eyeballs. Yikes; get a clue.)
Jeepers. Do you honestly believe it's impossible to turn a hex dump into a binary file? If so, I think we've been wasting each other's time.
If they are too small for that, then I suppose we have a problem.
Regardless, if you want to go on thinking a hex dump of Internet Explorer counts as its "source code", then more power to you, but don't be surprised if you find other people using a more practical definition of the term.
Assembly doesn't have a 1-1 mapping to machine code. There are macros, labels, comments, data declarations, branch optimizations, syntax (intel vs. at&t) etc, etc, etc. There's no reason to believe that a disassembly is equivalent to the source code in any important way except that it assembles to the same binary.
To claim any text transformable into a given program is that program's "source code" dilutes the meaning of the term to the point of uselessness.
Oh I see. So a whole picture is worth 3 words.
How did you arrive at that number?
I did miss the hardening angle, though I find it hard to imagine that the leading edges of the orbiter could possibly be hard enough to withstand impacts the size of a paint-fleck in orbit.
That's why he's asking about paperwork and policies. If they sign a contract saying they don't own certain kinds of code, then that can supersede the "work for hire" copyright issue.
If the shuttle got hit with a fleck of paint during launch, nobody would notice. If the shuttle got hit with a piece of foam in orbit, I think it would likely be destroyed.
Didn't they write Windows NT and Internet Explorer?
You will never get people to stop reporting average benchmark scores. Better get used to it.
If you're happy with your P2, then good for you, but don't assume everyone would be happy with your P2. (At home I have a dual Celeron-400 which suits me just fine.)
So, Mr. Smarty Pants, suppose you're trying to evaluate different CPU architectures to decide which one will give the most bang for the buck. How exactly would you evaluate them for performance without benchmarks?
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=66073&cid=6083 991
But if it's increasing exponentially, there's no need to start it at $100 at year 15. It can start at just $1 at year 15, and you'd still hit your every dollar mark 35 years later.
http://radinfo.musc.edu/images/photos/MRIvsChair01 .jpg
http://radinfo.musc.edu/images/photos/MRIvsChair02 .jpg
No, not a cheat-sheet, but an examination-specific memory optimization.
Dude, that's Star Wars.
Ok, that's fair enough, assuming it's the real explanation.