Indeed, it is just an anecdote. And as it is just one anecdote and it is the single example brought up again and again, I would not take it as generally useful.
But your example certainly raises the question of intelligent design, but maybe not benevolent design.
In no way does it raise the question of intelligent design. A parasite that invades the entire body is certainly going to have an effect on behaviour. It is easy to imagine that over hundreds of millions of years, certain behaviour that will spread the parasite better would be selected. There is no need for a designer.
Do not presume that if humans do not know the reason behind the suffering that there is no reason. That suffering is somehow always evil and to be avoided.
To me, this is the worst possible attempt at justifying things. "Yes, we are suffering, but it might be for our own good."
In fact probably the least parasitic is fungus and other such life forms, that mostly feed on dead things.
Fungi can do very nasty things indeed. There is a fungus that takes over ants and controls their nervous systems so that they climb to the top of plants to allow dispersal of spores.
Hint: Trying to judge the software development market based on your Debian installation is futile.
Heh. This sums up so much about posts on development languages on Slashdot.
Re:They aren't alternatives.
on
Practical Mono
·
· Score: 1
Yes, and what useful office/business applications are written in SWING?
Look back at my post. Moneydance is a business application.
I've still yet see a java app launch at anywhere near the speed an equivalent Windows app does (even the second time it gets launched and may have been cached).Eclipse is one of the slowest IDE's out there. I would venture it is slower than Borland's (though, that may be debatable:) ).
Open Moneydance under Windows. Opens in a few seconds. So do other apps such as JEdit. You can hardly compare IDE speeds as a basis for typical application performance.
Re:Performance good enough for games?
on
Practical Mono
·
· Score: 1
No you can't.
Yes you can.
Using a custom allocator in C# would be a pain in the ass to such an extent as to boggle the mind. This has jack-all to do with pointer arithmetic, btw.
Who needs a custom allocator? You can allocate areas of memory. You can use them. You can free them when you like. Check the MSDN site - there is plenty of documentation.
Like what? Are you going to impress me with some Quake 2 port with weak performance that depends on JNI to issue OpenGL commands?
Well yes, I am. I don't accept your arbitrary use of 'weak performance', which is simply a phrase you are using without evidence to make a point. Others don't think it has weak performance. JNI is simply a way of calling OpenGL code. Are you implying in some strange way that major game writers don't use DirectX or OpenGL to get performance? Of course they do. Why shouldn't Java?
Or maybe some game that doesn't require optimization because it could be safely written in VB4?
No - there are other games. Tribal Trouble for example.
Only the performance critical sections, you illiterate twit.
Great way to argue! I guess this is what happens when people run out of facts.
As a Java web homo, I'm sure you've had a lot of experience working on 3D games.
Well, actually, you have a lot right here!
I use Java, I write Web apps, and I am gay, so 'Java Web Homo' is pretty accurate!
As for working on 3D games - no, but I have done 3D stuff in Java - molecular graphics, terrain contouring...
On the other hand, the conclusions don't vary that widely - doing something about global warming with current technology is at best a wash and probably costs more than it is worth.
No, that is certainly not a widespread opinion. For example, a move to nuclear technology uses current technology and would have a dramatic impact on CO2 output. It would also hugely lessen requirements on hydrocarbon supplies from increasingly politically unstable areas of the world.
The obvious solution is to develop the right technology (at the right cost), and then implement it.
That is not a solution - that is a dangerous postponement, as we have no idea how long that would take, and we have no idea what technology to develop!
In short, the scientists say "there is a problem". The economists say "the cure is worse than the disease". So both left and right are wrong on global warming, according to the experts.
Scientists are mostly saying that the problem is going to be very severe unless we do something starting now. Economists don't seem to be good at evaluating the expense of large world-wide changes that could have a serious impact, but a generation away. The problem is that when changes are irrefutable (such as when the arctic sea ice vanishes - which could happen in only a few decades) then it is probably to late to avoid serious world-wide changes whose impact could be beyond our ability to sensibly cost.
Re:Performance good enough for games?
on
Practical Mono
·
· Score: 1
Using C# means losing control of memory management. Life-time, locality, overhead, and allocation complexity.
Of course it doesn't. All this means is that you lose control of this using pointers to 'raw memory' (which, of course, is never 'raw' under a well-managed OS). You can have full control of allocation, life-time and management of objects and storage within managed areas.
The only saving grace of the CLR vs. Java is that when it comes time to interface the high-performance code you've had to write in C, at least you don't have to deal with JNI.
Of course, all these arguments are made redundant by the fact that there are now high-performance 3D games written in managed languages like Java with no call-outs to user code in C for performance. Graphical performance is available by optional use of DirectX or OpenGL.
The argument that everything needs to be hand-optimised and managed is just starting to look rather old fashioned and stale....
Re:Performance good enough for games?
on
Practical Mono
·
· Score: 1
So would a 3D video game's graphics or physics run acceptably fast in managed code (e.g. C# or managed C++) compared to unmanaged code?
Yes. Much of the 'management' can be optimised out by code analysis at runtime. I have seen reports of C# physics application running pretty close to C++ speed.
Re:They aren't alternatives.
on
Practical Mono
·
· Score: 1
Swing is still slower than Windows.Forms, is NOT as integrated, lacks a decent Forms designer and because Java's inherant lack of basic language features like events and delegates, event-driven GUI is near impossible as code is unnecessarily bloated and unintuitive. This and many more reasons is why there are still no mainstream Windows applications based on Swing.
This is wrong in so many ways it is hard to know where to start. However, I shall try and be brief. First, Swing can be as fast as anything on windows because on modern JVMs it can have direct access to accelerated graphic functions, just like Windows components. Secondly, it is highly integrated with the operating system (take a look at Java Native Desktop Components). Thirdly, there have been first-rate Java form designers for years. The latest GUI tools on NetBeans are some of the best ever. Fourthly, Java has had events in almost since it started. Delegates are a highly debated language issue - most GUIs don't have them. Finally, (and this completely wrecks your argument) there are, of course, mainstream applications that run on Windows that use Swing.
The personal and small business financial package Moneydance has been highly rated - even by the Washington Post. It is a Swing application.
The highly successful P2P program LimeWire is a Swing application.
The Yahoo! Site Builder is a widely used program. It is a Swing application.
Re:question about native code
on
Practical Mono
·
· Score: 1
If I need high performance out of something in C#/.Net, I can always write it in native C++ and package it up as a COM object.
I don't see the point. C# on.NET is not that slow. I could understand needing to use native C++ if you were running something that was several times slower, but there really isn't that much difference between C# and C++. The use of unmanaged code is to allow legacy C++ code to run on.NET, and to allow all sorts of 'unsafe' things to be done. Performance is not a good reason to do this.
apocalypse-preaching enviromentalists. The rise has been somewhere between 10 and 25 cm in the last hundred years, and the predictions are 10 to 90 more in the next century (via IPCC).
You need to read more of what the IPCC says. Even minor sea level rises such as a few tens of cm can cause vast areas of inundation and land erosion. There are other effects such as the salination of rivers, increases in storm surges. Even a 90 cm rise would have a dramatic impact on coastal areas where more than 2/3 of people live.
Of course, sea level rises are just one minor part of the climatic effects of warming. Things change, such as once-a-century storms turning up every decade, and causing billions of dollars of damage.
A problem that is worth spending hundreds of billions per year to only slightly mitigate? Not even close.
Not even close to what it will cost if we don't. If we do nothing, then feedback loops set in (assuming they haven't already). If the Greenland ice melts (as it is already starting to), then we would be talking of sea rises of 700 cm, having dramatic effects world-wide. Then there is the antarctic ice.
Of course, sorting out carbon dioxide production would not cost anything like as much as hundreds of billions of dollars annually - you just made that up. A one-off budget of that amount would have a dramatic impact, allowing a switch to nuclear power, and helping to set up a massive recycling infrastructure.
I have learned a good rule when looking at matters of controversy like this. If the vast majority of experts disagree with me, I am usually wrong. They know more than me.
If you need crossplatform compatability and scalability, you're better of with Java but forget the fast graphical application witht it.
Why? These days Swing is directX or opengl accelerated, and very well integrated with the Windows desktop and system. If you want something even more native use the cross-platform SWT toolkit.
Now I'm neither a physicist nor a solar scientist, but this doesn't seem entirely unplausible to me. Is there a reason why a 50K increase in the temperature of the Sun is so unrealistic?
Yes. The Sun is extremely massive. Raising the temperature 50K for a substantial period would require an enormous change in the behaviour of the Sun.
I suspect that's the reason for the sudden change of heart. They know Linux won't be able to get any Solaris tech due to Linux being stuck at GPL2, and get to score brownie points with GPL-lovers.
So you really think that a large corporation would put time and effort into adding licenses to Solaris to snub Linux and to score brownie points?
The reason for the current licensing of Solaris is nothing to do with preventing technology transfer. After all, Sun have transferred plenty of technology to competing operating systems - Java, NFS, work on GNOME.
Slashdot Mirror
Some literature (well, anecdote) on why you should use lisp: http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html
Indeed, it is just an anecdote. And as it is just one anecdote and it is the single example brought up again and again, I would not take it as generally useful.
But your example certainly raises the question of intelligent design, but maybe not benevolent design.
In no way does it raise the question of intelligent design. A parasite that invades the entire body is certainly going to have an effect on behaviour. It is easy to imagine that over hundreds of millions of years, certain behaviour that will spread the parasite better would be selected. There is no need for a designer.
RESEARCH DOESN'T INDICATE COURSES OF ACTION.
Research simply says "this is what is happening" and draws no other conclusions.
Er, no. Research can also say "this is happening because...." and therefore it can say "this will stop happening if...."
Do not presume that if humans do not know the reason behind the suffering that there is no reason. That suffering is somehow always evil and to be avoided.
To me, this is the worst possible attempt at justifying things. "Yes, we are suffering, but it might be for our own good."
In fact probably the least parasitic is fungus and other such life forms, that mostly feed on dead things.
Fungi can do very nasty things indeed. There is a fungus that takes over ants and controls their nervous systems so that they climb to the top of plants to allow dispersal of spores.
because Loving and Suffering are two subjective statements, and is strictly relative those who subscribe to those two ideas
Yeah, right. Tell that to the millions who die from unpleasant parasitic diseases each year - "Your suffering is only subjective".
Because he gave us a thing called free will. Disobeying him (sinning) is what causes pain and suffering, whether for ourselves or others.
So parasitic wasps are sinners?
of God's Intelligent Design on Earth
Parasitism was one of the reasons that Charles Darwin lost his faith in later years. How could a loving God create so much suffering?
Hint: Trying to judge the software development market based on your Debian installation is futile.
Heh. This sums up so much about posts on development languages on Slashdot.
Yes, and what useful office/business applications are written in SWING?
:) ).
Look back at my post. Moneydance is a business application.
I've still yet see a java app launch at anywhere near the speed an equivalent Windows app does (even the second time it gets launched and may have been cached).Eclipse is one of the slowest IDE's out there. I would venture it is slower than Borland's (though, that may be debatable
Open Moneydance under Windows. Opens in a few seconds. So do other apps such as JEdit. You can hardly compare IDE speeds as a basis for typical application performance.
No you can't.
Yes you can.
Using a custom allocator in C# would be a pain in the ass to such an extent as to boggle the mind. This has jack-all to do with pointer arithmetic, btw.
Who needs a custom allocator? You can allocate areas of memory. You can use them. You can free them when you like. Check the MSDN site - there is plenty of documentation.
Like what? Are you going to impress me with some Quake 2 port with weak performance that depends on JNI to issue OpenGL commands?
Well yes, I am. I don't accept your arbitrary use of 'weak performance', which is simply a phrase you are using without evidence to make a point. Others don't think it has weak performance. JNI is simply a way of calling OpenGL code. Are you implying in some strange way that major game writers don't use DirectX or OpenGL to get performance? Of course they do. Why shouldn't Java?
Or maybe some game that doesn't require optimization because it could be safely written in VB4?
No - there are other games. Tribal Trouble for example.
Only the performance critical sections, you illiterate twit.
Great way to argue! I guess this is what happens when people run out of facts.
As a Java web homo, I'm sure you've had a lot of experience working on 3D games.
Well, actually, you have a lot right here!
I use Java, I write Web apps, and I am gay, so 'Java Web Homo' is pretty accurate!
As for working on 3D games - no, but I have done 3D stuff in Java - molecular graphics, terrain contouring...
On the other hand, the conclusions don't vary that widely - doing something about global warming with current technology is at best a wash and probably costs more than it is worth.
No, that is certainly not a widespread opinion. For example, a move to nuclear technology uses current technology and would have a dramatic impact on CO2 output. It would also hugely lessen requirements on hydrocarbon supplies from increasingly politically unstable areas of the world.
The obvious solution is to develop the right technology (at the right cost), and then implement it.
That is not a solution - that is a dangerous postponement, as we have no idea how long that would take, and we have no idea what technology to develop!
In short, the scientists say "there is a problem". The economists say "the cure is worse than the disease". So both left and right are wrong on global warming, according to the experts.
Scientists are mostly saying that the problem is going to be very severe unless we do something starting now. Economists don't seem to be good at evaluating the expense of large world-wide changes that could have a serious impact, but a generation away. The problem is that when changes are irrefutable (such as when the arctic sea ice vanishes - which could happen in only a few decades) then it is probably to late to avoid serious world-wide changes whose impact could be beyond our ability to sensibly cost.
Using C# means losing control of memory management. Life-time, locality, overhead, and allocation complexity.
Of course it doesn't. All this means is that you lose control of this using pointers to 'raw memory' (which, of course, is never 'raw' under a well-managed OS). You can have full control of allocation, life-time and management of objects and storage within managed areas.
The only saving grace of the CLR vs. Java is that when it comes time to interface the high-performance code you've had to write in C, at least you don't have to deal with JNI.
Of course, all these arguments are made redundant by the fact that there are now high-performance 3D games written in managed languages like Java with no call-outs to user code in C for performance. Graphical performance is available by optional use of DirectX or OpenGL.
The argument that everything needs to be hand-optimised and managed is just starting to look rather old fashioned and stale....
So would a 3D video game's graphics or physics run acceptably fast in managed code (e.g. C# or managed C++) compared to unmanaged code?
Yes. Much of the 'management' can be optimised out by code analysis at runtime. I have seen reports of C# physics application running pretty close to C++ speed.
Swing is still slower than Windows.Forms, is NOT as integrated, lacks a decent Forms designer and because Java's inherant lack of basic language features like events and delegates, event-driven GUI is near impossible as code is unnecessarily bloated and unintuitive. This and many more reasons is why there are still no mainstream Windows applications based on Swing.
This is wrong in so many ways it is hard to know where to start. However, I shall try and be brief. First, Swing can be as fast as anything on windows because on modern JVMs it can have direct access to accelerated graphic functions, just like Windows components. Secondly, it is highly integrated with the operating system (take a look at Java Native Desktop Components). Thirdly, there have been first-rate Java form designers for years. The latest GUI tools on NetBeans are some of the best ever. Fourthly, Java has had events in almost since it started. Delegates are a highly debated language issue - most GUIs don't have them. Finally, (and this completely wrecks your argument) there are, of course, mainstream applications that run on Windows that use Swing.
The personal and small business financial package Moneydance has been highly rated - even by the Washington Post. It is a Swing application.
The highly successful P2P program LimeWire is a Swing application.
The Yahoo! Site Builder is a widely used program. It is a Swing application.
If I need high performance out of something in C#/.Net, I can always write it in native C++ and package it up as a COM object.
.NET is not that slow. I could understand needing to use native C++ if you were running something that was several times slower, but there really isn't that much difference between C# and C++. The use of unmanaged code is to allow legacy C++ code to run on .NET, and to allow all sorts of 'unsafe' things to be done. Performance is not a good reason to do this.
I don't see the point. C# on
apocalypse-preaching enviromentalists. The rise has been somewhere between 10 and 25 cm in the last hundred years, and the predictions are 10 to 90 more in the next century (via IPCC).
You need to read more of what the IPCC says. Even minor sea level rises such as a few tens of cm can cause vast areas of inundation and land erosion. There are other effects such as the salination of rivers, increases in storm surges. Even a 90 cm rise would have a dramatic impact on coastal areas where more than 2/3 of people live.
Of course, sea level rises are just one minor part of the climatic effects of warming. Things change, such as once-a-century storms turning up every decade, and causing billions of dollars of damage.
A problem that is worth spending hundreds of billions per year to only slightly mitigate? Not even close.
Not even close to what it will cost if we don't. If we do nothing, then feedback loops set in (assuming they haven't already). If the Greenland ice melts (as it is already starting to), then we would be talking of sea rises of 700 cm, having dramatic effects world-wide. Then there is the antarctic ice.
Of course, sorting out carbon dioxide production would not cost anything like as much as hundreds of billions of dollars annually - you just made that up. A one-off budget of that amount would have a dramatic impact, allowing a switch to nuclear power, and helping to set up a massive recycling infrastructure.
I have learned a good rule when looking at matters of controversy like this. If the vast majority of experts disagree with me, I am usually wrong. They know more than me.
It is in a constant state of flux and you can never go back to where you were. Organisms will live, die, and move. It will still be nature.
True, but that is not the point. We don't want to provoke change faster than we can deal with it.
The sea level rise could be less, could be more. So far, it is sure failing to live up to expectations.
It is? How so?
If you need crossplatform compatability and scalability, you're better of with Java but forget the fast graphical application witht it.
Why? These days Swing is directX or opengl accelerated, and very well integrated with the Windows desktop and system. If you want something even more native use the cross-platform SWT toolkit.
It is even more difficult to convince about something that become more about political bashing than scientific fact. JAM
I would be interested to know how political bashing has already caused substantial decreases in polar ice levels.
Now I'm neither a physicist nor a solar scientist, but this doesn't seem entirely unplausible to me. Is there a reason why a 50K increase in the temperature of the Sun is so unrealistic?
Yes. The Sun is extremely massive. Raising the temperature 50K for a substantial period would require an enormous change in the behaviour of the Sun.
It's all guesswork as to what the effects are.
No it isn't. CO2 is a heat-trapping gas. Pumping more CO2 into the atmosphere will trap heat.
Unless I missed something, we don't have detailed weather data before the 19th century. So centennial weather forecasts are a little dicey.
t m?site=http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/topstory/2003/1211 millenium.html
You missed something.
http://archaeology.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.h
I suspect that's the reason for the sudden change of heart. They know Linux won't be able to get any Solaris tech due to Linux being stuck at GPL2, and get to score brownie points with GPL-lovers.
So you really think that a large corporation would put time and effort into adding licenses to Solaris to snub Linux and to score brownie points?
The reason for the current licensing of Solaris is nothing to do with preventing technology transfer. After all, Sun have transferred plenty of technology to competing operating systems - Java, NFS, work on GNOME.
It is because of patent issues in Solaris.