Anyway, I refer you to the February 2001 issue of Java Report, specifically to an article entitled "High Performance Java Software Development". One of the timing comparisons presented in the article mentions that it can take Java (HotSpot JIT) as much as 115 seconds to run a 1 million point quicksort. It takes C++ 0.88 seconds to do the same.
1)The Lego Mindstorm Robotics Invention Kit
2)The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Aniversary Edition.
3)The Art of Computer Programming, by Donald Knuth; all of them!
4)A Palm (doesn't matter which one) and the O'Reilly programming books for it.
5)The Complete Set of O'Reilly X Windows books (sentimental reasons)
Let me be facetious for a moment here: the comunity is the USA and the standards are the articles of the Constitution as amended. The standards of any town or city are overriden by it.
Re:What are you so damn afraid of?
on
CALEA update
·
· Score: 1
Lord spare me from decent people. I would sugest you look up operation COINTELPRO, under good ole J.Edgar Hoover. The fact that the feds may THINK they have reason to listen to me has nothing to do with the fact that they may not have a RIGHT to do so.
You can have freedom or you can have safety. Don't insult my intelligence by asking for both.
When I left Cisco, I swore I would never attempt to teach IP routing to a clueless crowd ever again. Time to renege, I guess.
I have not seen the marketing materials Yahoo! is talking about. But I do know what a Cisco router (and a Nortel, Bay, etc) can do. One of the things it can do is prioritize or block traffic based on source/destination pairs, protocol numbers, whether or not its SYN bit is set, whatever. What I am seeing is that people somehow find fault in a router being able to do this. I'm speechless. Depending on the drugs you were smoking at the time, you COULD find fault with Cisco Marketing playing up this feature. This, combined with the fact that cable ISPs (let's not dance semantically here, shall we) are monopolistic entities by virtue of their infrastructure ownership, can be seen as quite nefarious. But can any of you goobers actually tell me that the fact that you can filter traffic on a Cisco router is, of itself, wrong? As an ex-member of Cisco Engineering (though not speaking for them) give me a goddamm break.
Your ISP can filter websites any time they want, by the way. The difference is that you have a choice in dial-up ISPs. You typically don't with a cable ISP, giving the latter much more leeway in the unethical things they can do.
I think, though, that a lot of linux users are missing the point. Linux is a GREAT server OS.
I find you guilty of typecasting, as charged.
(I shall define great as being able to be used by most users immediately after install).
Not only do I disagree with your definition , but do I have to remind you about System 7? I mean , you could use it right away, for about five secs... I have tried linux. I don't have the time to invest into setting it up or tweaking it so that it works.
I don't want to misunderstand this. Are you saying you have no time to learn? Have any of you checked out the specs on Be? Be uses a 64-bit Journaling File System. It has pervasive multi-threading, pre-emptive multi-tasking, and excellent use of SMP. It already has a security/multi-user architecture set-up waiting for a time when it will be usefull. Many have said that they could not use X. Well if you go to the BeWine page you will see that they have ported X-Windows over and are working on a port of Wine as well.
I think we can agree that X is a non-issue. Lack of X Windows is not why Be is weak. I will finish with this last thought. Please remember that the OSS dev model transends all OS's. Just because an OS isn't open source does not mean you can't design a good app for it. The only reason there aren't a lot of OS apps on Be is because THEY HAVEN'T BEEN WRITTEN YET (and/or ported). Before you start thinking of how to flame me, remember that linux too was once really young with no apps, and that it took time before mainstream users started to notice it. Let the moderation begin.
I agree, Be can be a great OS(but can Be be all it can be?), but please, for the love of all that's holy, ixnay on the "it works right out of the box" thing. Didn't anyone watch Kung Fu as kids? You think Kane was born good?
Powerful Meme? God spare me from people who read too much Joseph Campbell...
One interesting point in the article is that the author claims not to wish the difficulty of a Linux install on anyone. Having installed Slackware (more than 20 machines), Red Hat and SuSe, I really don't see the big deal. I would wish the learning experience on anyone, because I have no patience for people who do not know what they are doing and who have no wish to learn. How hard does the point of a computer NOT being a toaster or an appliance have to be driven? I respect the BeOS, and wish it well, but they have a handful of apps and a consistent interface. Linux has thousands of apps, and an inconsistent interface. Methinks that Linux can narrow the interface gap before BeOS narrows the app gap.
I could only become convinced of a "sudden" change in the PAS rules if someone showed me: 1) a dated copy of the rules supporting Sun's position 2)a dated copy showing the "change".
Having worked with ISO standards for some time at the networking company I used to work at (no names), I seriously doubt that ISO, at any time, gave Sun the impression that they (Sun) could retain control. Maybe this PAS thingie was different (again, I'd like to see the docs), but if that was the case, it would have been EXTREMELY uncharacteristic of ISO.
In addition, a lot of the messages at ftp://dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC22/JSG/ seem to give lie to Sun's version.
Slashdot Mirror
That's kinda the way I feel. More so since I saw the uncut version of said film
Aren't ad hominem arguments cool?
I know Java is but what am I?
Anyway, I refer you to the February 2001 issue of Java Report, specifically to an article entitled "High Performance Java Software Development". One of the timing comparisons presented in the article mentions that it can take Java (HotSpot JIT) as much as 115 seconds to run a 1 million point quicksort. It takes C++ 0.88 seconds to do the same.
1)The Lego Mindstorm Robotics Invention Kit
2)The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Aniversary Edition.
3)The Art of Computer Programming, by Donald Knuth; all of them!
4)A Palm (doesn't matter which one) and the O'Reilly programming books for it.
5)The Complete Set of O'Reilly X Windows books (sentimental reasons)
Let me be facetious for a moment here: the comunity is the USA and the standards are the articles of the Constitution as amended. The standards of any town or city are overriden by it.
Lord spare me from decent people. I would sugest you look up operation COINTELPRO, under good ole J.Edgar Hoover. The fact that the feds may THINK they have reason to listen to me has nothing to do with the fact that they may not have a RIGHT to do so.
You can have freedom or you can have safety. Don't insult my intelligence by asking for both.
When I left Cisco, I swore I would never attempt to teach IP routing to a clueless crowd ever again. Time to renege, I guess.
I have not seen the marketing materials Yahoo! is talking about. But I do know what a Cisco router (and a Nortel, Bay, etc) can do. One of the things it can do is prioritize or block traffic based on source/destination pairs, protocol numbers, whether or not its SYN bit is set, whatever. What I am seeing is that people somehow find fault in a router being able to do this. I'm speechless. Depending on the drugs you were smoking at the time, you COULD find fault with Cisco Marketing playing up this feature. This, combined with the fact that cable ISPs (let's not dance semantically here, shall we) are monopolistic entities by virtue of their infrastructure ownership, can be seen as quite nefarious. But can any of you goobers actually tell me that the fact that you can filter traffic on a Cisco router is, of itself, wrong? As an ex-member of Cisco Engineering (though not speaking for them) give me a goddamm break.
Your ISP can filter websites any time they want, by the way. The difference is that you have a choice in dial-up ISPs. You typically don't with a cable ISP, giving the latter much more leeway in the unethical things they can do.
I think, though, that a lot of linux users are missing the point. Linux is a GREAT server OS.
I find you guilty of typecasting, as charged.
(I shall define great as being able to be used by most users immediately after install).
Not only do I disagree with your definition , but do I have to remind you about System 7? I mean , you could use it right away, for about five secs...
I have tried linux. I don't have the time to invest into setting it up or tweaking it so that it works.
I don't want to misunderstand this. Are you saying you have no time to learn?
Have any of you checked out the specs on Be? Be uses a 64-bit Journaling File System. It has pervasive multi-threading, pre-emptive multi-tasking, and excellent use of SMP. It already has a security/multi-user architecture set-up waiting for a time when it will be usefull.
Many have said that they could not use X. Well if you go to the BeWine page you will see that they have ported X-Windows over and are working on a port of Wine as well.
I think we can agree that X is a non-issue. Lack of X Windows is not why Be is weak.
I will finish with this last thought. Please remember that the OSS dev model transends all OS's. Just because an OS isn't open source does not mean you can't design a good app for it. The only reason there aren't a lot of OS apps on Be is because THEY HAVEN'T BEEN WRITTEN YET (and/or ported). Before you start thinking of how to flame me, remember that linux too was once really young with no apps, and that it took time before mainstream users started to notice it.
Let the moderation begin.
I agree, Be can be a great OS(but can Be be all it can be?), but please, for the love of all that's holy, ixnay on the "it works right out of the box" thing. Didn't anyone watch Kung Fu as kids? You think Kane was born good?
Powerful Meme? God spare me from people who read too much Joseph Campbell...
One interesting point in the article is that the author claims not to wish the difficulty of a Linux install on anyone. Having installed Slackware (more than 20 machines), Red Hat and SuSe, I really don't see the big deal. I would wish the learning experience on anyone, because I have no patience for people who do not know what they are doing and who have no wish to learn. How hard does the point of a computer NOT being a toaster or an appliance have to be driven?
I respect the BeOS, and wish it well, but they have a handful of apps and a consistent interface. Linux has thousands of apps, and an inconsistent interface. Methinks that Linux can narrow the interface gap before BeOS narrows the app gap.
I could only become convinced of a "sudden" change in the PAS rules if someone showed me: 1) a dated copy of the rules supporting Sun's position 2)a dated copy showing the "change".
Having worked with ISO standards for some time at the networking company I used to work at (no names), I seriously doubt that ISO, at any time, gave Sun the impression that they (Sun) could retain control. Maybe this PAS thingie was different (again, I'd like to see the docs), but if that was the case, it would have been EXTREMELY uncharacteristic of ISO.
In addition, a lot of the messages at ftp://dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC22/JSG/ seem to give lie to Sun's version.