No, what's sad is that someone who isn't even involved with Amiga and doesn't plan on using it is criticizing others for doing something. I'm a linux bigot -- but I don't begrudge other projects out of hand (even including the cool stuff that Microsoft does)
When did Microsoft ever release a product where every feature claimed to work, works consistently, etc.. IE 5.5 crashes all the time for me, plus it takes out EXPLORER.EXE half the time with it. I don't understand why people think IE is so great -- In fact IE 5.0 was much more stable than 5.5...
Can't we just build a memorial to stupid people with too much money so they involve themselves in irrational causes like building memorials to good energy supplies instead? I invision a giant tent with enough purple Kool-Aid(tm) to go around.
I disagree. Being in group projects in school taught me an Important Life Lesson: other people are unreliable.
But how many times do we have to learn this lesson? It is tiersome to learn it in grade school, junior high school, high school, undergraduate, graduate, etc. etc. etc. It also teaches the uncaring how to slack in a group setting: Is that an Important Life Lesson for them? You bet, but it's a huge pain in my ass.
But doing this teaches a great lesson for the working world! By being put in groups with folks who need some extra help, universities around the world are preparing scientists and engineers for day-to-day dealings with marketing and sales departments.
Do we really need the university to "teach" us what we already know; especially since it seems that every discipline is trying to "teach" us this same "lesson" over and over and over again.
Which is the reason for, as someone else suggested, inner-group grading. Just like performance evaluations by the leaders of groups in the business world.
Which works just fine up until you get a Machiavelian member and an apathetic teacher that uses group-think to get out of grading. This happens all the time; it's not like the poor perfomers write "Ha, yeah, well, I didn't do much on this project." It's usually more like "Everyone else slacked while I did all the work" (lie lie lie).
Besides, we can always work in groups of our own volition, right? We don't need the professor to assign them, right?
Sorry about forgetting to close the italic tag; maybe if I were working in a group we wouldn't have decided to do that. Then again, we'd probably be sitting in front of a computer right now planning on the best way to communicate on Friday afternoons (because that's the only time we can meet outside of class).:)
It may seem like a cliche to you, but if you ever teach, you'll find that it is so *very* true. As a student, even if my class partner was below me in understanding, the act of explaining the material to them helped to reinforce my understanding better than I could have done alone. Later, when I taught calculus for the first time, it was amazing how much it deepened my understanding of the subject. Being able to solve every example, explain every detail and nuance, and do it spontaneously in front of a live audience is much more demanding than just having to solve problems during an hour exam. In fact I would say as a general rule, that if you can't explain a topic verbally to someone in a coherent and understandable way, you probably don't understand it as well as you think.
I have (and do) teach. I love to teach. I have no complaints against group work where everyone is a caring individual; it's only when the uncaring people get involved that it becomes a useless mess. Due to the fact that it is impossible to assign groups where there will be no uncaring people, I can say that group work is a dubious undertaking. I've had lab partners that were incredible; I've also had ones that sit there and ask, "What was the answer to number 4b again?" (ready with their #2 pencil to mark the correct response). Working in groups is critical to real-life jobs and situations; but in a university setting where your grade is yours alone it has little place.
I had exactly one professor that allowed us to "fire" fellow classmates on jobs. The entire class was a group excercise in large software development and we divided up into fairly large groups at our discression. We could punish individuals who didn't tow their weight (and even punish those that did pull their weight for whatever reason the masses desired -- fairness has little to do with it). There is still at least one student I know of that has an incomplete in this class because of this (remember, I graduated in 1997).
Besides: What prevents you from working in collaborative groups without the professor demanding that you do so? Humans are social creatures and we make alliances with positive effects anyway...
I used them so that students could teach each other. I wanted the strong students to help the weak
I want to redefine the terms; strong and weak are victimization characteristics. I'll use students that care and students that don't care.
The caring students didn't help the uncaring. The caring did all the hard work and left the busy work for the uncaring to do. Some projects have a lot of mindless busy work (a database application, for example -- or help files), some don't. The students that care will end up doing all the goal-oriented work while the others will fill in the gaps, even to the point of doing practically nothing. The students that care, work on the project all the time. The students that don't care want to schedule meetings to make lists (read the Dilbert Principle some day).
simply because you don't really understand something until you have to teach it to someone else
Another gross misconception; an academic cliche if you will. Every time I hear that my brain translates it into proper English: "Your professor is lazy."
I was asked far better questions by the students who helped others
That's because we know what you want. We ask hard questions because it will get us a good grade, because it pleases you. It's classic conditioning and one of the traits of highly successful people to boot.
I learned the most from the knowledgeable professors that made me sweat it out. They would see my problems and tell me to think about it some more; they wouldn't help me except for guiding with principles. I learned the least from group think pseudo-philosopher teachers with an agenda other than that of teaching the subject at hand.
I hated group projects. Every academic discipline has them now (especially colleges of Education and Business) with the supposed goal of "teaching the students to work in groups".
We "learn" how to do this in real life, we don't need the university to do it for us. In real life, you can fire people too, or at least pawn them off on a disadvantaged (doomed) project. In a university setting they happily cruise along thinking that life is going to be easy until they smack into a real job with real responsibilities. Universities do these people no favors by using fake group situations to coddle them.
I recieved my undergraduate (CS) in 1997, and I knew plenty of people who would laud the various internet sites with downloadable papers. There were sites with tens of thousands of papers back then and I don't even want to guess how many there are now. It's good to see that a smart professor actually exists.. er I mean, that at least one of them has had the bravery to go ahead and database their students' papers and perform this kind of analysis. I don't know about Virginia's policy, but at my alma mater (Idaho State), those students would immediately be kicked out of school, recieve an F for that course (and most likely all courses in that semester) and need to re-apply.
It'll be really interesting to see what happens to those that already graduated...:)
The automobile is coming to a maturity and GM is going through a mddle-aged crisis. With the '32 Chevy there really isn't a *need* to go any faster. It handles reasonably well and simple refinements are all that it needs. So we are bound to see useless things like tailfins and 3 year leases.
Oh no, not another useless car analogy. Let's face some facts here: Microsoft has always complained that UNIX is stagnant and old. There is a reason they think it is: it's pretty much done, and only needs minor tweaking now. All GUI/Desktop garbage aside, the OS itself is only changing to handle enterprise-class and embedded-clss hardware. Basic things like USB or Firewire support are simply extension to already-proven technologies. Windows 2000 is the penultimate version of Windows; they may need to tag on a new style of bus in the future or even make it scale up to 4096 processors someday -- but it's basically done.
Car analogies only serve to intentionally confuse the issue; people aren't going to buy or care or even know what operating system they're using in 50 years. Microsoft knows this, hence their new license confusion and open-source FUD campaign.
IBM is also working on M:N Threading which allows POSIX threads to choose whether or not to be kernel-level threads or userland-level threads. The upshot of all this is that "context switches" and spawns in userland threads is almost non-existant. Sun has been doing this for a long time: I/O bound threads need to be kernel-level for wait()-ish calls whereas GUI bound threads need to be userland for fast switching and spawning. More information is available here:
Well, you could always compile the module into the kernel instead of making it a LKM. I imagine that 2.5's compile will default to having POSIX security compiled into the kernel, or even have a new compile section like Loadable Security Support (y/N/m)?, where if you say yes, then you could choose from a number of risky schemes to use.
As soon as you start ripping
in WMP8, it starts playing the encoded files, and it encodes both.wma or.mp3 on my PIII/700 laptop about 3x real time. It's flawless. There seems to be no penalty for playing whilst ripping. It
has digital and analog error correction if your CDs have a few scratches like mine do.
In other words, stuff that Linux has been doing for well on 3 years already. RipperX will let you not only play and rip at the same time, but it will rip the next song off the drive while encoding the current song -- this used to save me a bunch of time when I ran it on my P166; not so much on my Athlon 1ghz, though. It uses cdparanoia to do the scratch repair and such.
Indeed. But unfortunately, having located the machine, they have introduced the one factor guaranteed to make it crash: humans.
Amen Brother!
I don't know how many times I've had the (dis)pleasure of walking someone through a set of mysterious problems with their Linux box only to find out after 10 minutes that they are running their own custom kernel, and the problems started shortly after.... Bizzare, no?
how will database integration, multiple monitor, 64-bit support, and international text display
help an average user?
answer - they won't.
Is it Moron Day on Slashdot? Should we change the name to "Slashdot: News for Whiners. Stuff for the clueless". Go read C-NET if you want to hear about how coddled you'll be with the next release of consumption-ware goodies from people who want your money. I won't even bother addressing your post because it's beyond help; if you can't see the benefits for what they are then please spare us the public display of ignorance.
You know, even though I am primarily a KDE user... and have had nothing but trouble with Gnome as a desktop... I really do see your point.
Well, I develop GNOME applications and I have no idea what he's talking about. KDE is a very nice desktop with a very nice API (it leaves GNOME behind in many regards -- as does GNOME in other areas do the reverse). All I heard from both your post and the parent was: "Whine whine whine whine. Whine whine, Windows, whine.". Sorry, but this is open source, and if you want to change something then feel free to do so.
The Gap did dM's "Just can't get Enough" for their leather line last year, and if you went to depechemode.com they had a disclaimer that they did not support using animal products at all. Twisted Sister balked that their record company was letting the infamous John Rocker (Atlanta Braves) use thier "I wanna Rock" song every time he came out [hmmm]--
I think the record companies are having fun with their 100% legal rights in these cases. The more they do this, the more incentive bands will have to steer clear of the RIAA and folks.
ASP and Perl don't even try to solve the same problems. ASP is an HTML-embedded language for server-side processing (much like JSP or PHP). Perl is a programming language. You can embed Perl in your web pages if want to, but you can't really compare the 2 languages without getting more specific. There are many ways to embed Perl into an HTML sheet for server interpretation -- and, yes, it's usually more powerful than ASP is in my experience.
As near as I can tell, Linus has nothing
bad to say about OS X in particular...just it's usage of the Mach microkernel which he (and lots of other kernel hackers) have dismissed as crap.
But MacOS X uses a modified Mach uK. Many of the OS services (ahem, filesystem) are directly provided by the BSD subsystem and skip the uK all together. The criticizm of Mach has to deal with these same issues, which is why Apple decided not to use Mach for every service. BSD doesn't just run as a strict server for Mach, it often bypasses it -- and as such, the opponents of Mach can still be vocal without attacking Apple's particular implementation.
MacOS X is a hybrid, much like some are prone to call the Linux kernel itself.
Slashdot Mirror
Besides, you forgot about Darwin.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Since we installed it, we've had only one virus problem, and it was a sneaker-net transimitted one.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
But how many times do we have to learn this lesson? It is tiersome to learn it in grade school, junior high school, high school, undergraduate, graduate, etc. etc. etc. It also teaches the uncaring how to slack in a group setting: Is that an Important Life Lesson for them? You bet, but it's a huge pain in my ass.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Do we really need the university to "teach" us what we already know; especially since it seems that every discipline is trying to "teach" us this same "lesson" over and over and over again.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Which works just fine up until you get a Machiavelian member and an apathetic teacher that uses group-think to get out of grading. This happens all the time; it's not like the poor perfomers write "Ha, yeah, well, I didn't do much on this project." It's usually more like "Everyone else slacked while I did all the work" (lie lie lie).
Besides, we can always work in groups of our own volition, right? We don't need the professor to assign them, right?
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
I have (and do) teach. I love to teach. I have no complaints against group work where everyone is a caring individual; it's only when the uncaring people get involved that it becomes a useless mess. Due to the fact that it is impossible to assign groups where there will be no uncaring people, I can say that group work is a dubious undertaking. I've had lab partners that were incredible; I've also had ones that sit there and ask, "What was the answer to number 4b again?" (ready with their #2 pencil to mark the correct response). Working in groups is critical to real-life jobs and situations; but in a university setting where your grade is yours alone it has little place.
I had exactly one professor that allowed us to "fire" fellow classmates on jobs. The entire class was a group excercise in large software development and we divided up into fairly large groups at our discression. We could punish individuals who didn't tow their weight (and even punish those that did pull their weight for whatever reason the masses desired -- fairness has little to do with it). There is still at least one student I know of that has an incomplete in this class because of this (remember, I graduated in 1997).
Besides: What prevents you from working in collaborative groups without the professor demanding that you do so? Humans are social creatures and we make alliances with positive effects anyway...
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Well, at least one of our classmates was kicked out of the program (CIS anyway, if you consider them classmates to us CS-types).
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
I used them so that students could teach each other. I wanted the strong students to help the weak
I want to redefine the terms; strong and weak are victimization characteristics. I'll use students that care and students that don't care. The caring students didn't help the uncaring. The caring did all the hard work and left the busy work for the uncaring to do. Some projects have a lot of mindless busy work (a database application, for example -- or help files), some don't. The students that care will end up doing all the goal-oriented work while the others will fill in the gaps, even to the point of doing practically nothing. The students that care, work on the project all the time. The students that don't care want to schedule meetings to make lists (read the Dilbert Principle some day).
simply because you don't really understand something until you have to teach it to someone else
Another gross misconception; an academic cliche if you will. Every time I hear that my brain translates it into proper English: "Your professor is lazy."
I was asked far better questions by the students who helped others
That's because we know what you want. We ask hard questions because it will get us a good grade, because it pleases you. It's classic conditioning and one of the traits of highly successful people to boot.
I learned the most from the knowledgeable professors that made me sweat it out. They would see my problems and tell me to think about it some more; they wouldn't help me except for guiding with principles. I learned the least from group think pseudo-philosopher teachers with an agenda other than that of teaching the subject at hand.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
We "learn" how to do this in real life, we don't need the university to do it for us. In real life, you can fire people too, or at least pawn them off on a disadvantaged (doomed) project. In a university setting they happily cruise along thinking that life is going to be easy until they smack into a real job with real responsibilities. Universities do these people no favors by using fake group situations to coddle them.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
It'll be really interesting to see what happens to those that already graduated... :)
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Oh no, not another useless car analogy. Let's face some facts here: Microsoft has always complained that UNIX is stagnant and old. There is a reason they think it is: it's pretty much done, and only needs minor tweaking now. All GUI/Desktop garbage aside, the OS itself is only changing to handle enterprise-class and embedded-clss hardware. Basic things like USB or Firewire support are simply extension to already-proven technologies. Windows 2000 is the penultimate version of Windows; they may need to tag on a new style of bus in the future or even make it scale up to 4096 processors someday -- but it's basically done.
Car analogies only serve to intentionally confuse the issue; people aren't going to buy or care or even know what operating system they're using in 50 years. Microsoft knows this, hence their new license confusion and open-source FUD campaign.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
*sigh*
MacOS doesn't use a traditional Mach uK. It completely bypasses Mach for many functions, all because Mach is too slow to do many things.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
http://oss.software.ibm.com/developerworks/opensou rce/pthreads/
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
In other words, stuff that Linux has been doing for well on 3 years already. RipperX will let you not only play and rip at the same time, but it will rip the next song off the drive while encoding the current song -- this used to save me a bunch of time when I ran it on my P166; not so much on my Athlon 1ghz, though. It uses cdparanoia to do the scratch repair and such.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Amen Brother!
I don't know how many times I've had the (dis)pleasure of walking someone through a set of mysterious problems with their Linux box only to find out after 10 minutes that they are running their own custom kernel, and the problems started shortly after.... Bizzare, no?
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Is it Moron Day on Slashdot? Should we change the name to "Slashdot: News for Whiners. Stuff for the clueless". Go read C-NET if you want to hear about how coddled you'll be with the next release of consumption-ware goodies from people who want your money. I won't even bother addressing your post because it's beyond help; if you can't see the benefits for what they are then please spare us the public display of ignorance.
Have a nice day.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Well, I develop GNOME applications and I have no idea what he's talking about. KDE is a very nice desktop with a very nice API (it leaves GNOME behind in many regards -- as does GNOME in other areas do the reverse). All I heard from both your post and the parent was: "Whine whine whine whine. Whine whine, Windows, whine.". Sorry, but this is open source, and if you want to change something then feel free to do so.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
I think the record companies are having fun with their 100% legal rights in these cases. The more they do this, the more incentive bands will have to steer clear of the RIAA and folks.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
But MacOS X uses a modified Mach uK. Many of the OS services (ahem, filesystem) are directly provided by the BSD subsystem and skip the uK all together. The criticizm of Mach has to deal with these same issues, which is why Apple decided not to use Mach for every service. BSD doesn't just run as a strict server for Mach, it often bypasses it -- and as such, the opponents of Mach can still be vocal without attacking Apple's particular implementation.
MacOS X is a hybrid, much like some are prone to call the Linux kernel itself.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.