Are you sure about that? Medieval theory of motion was based on Aristotle. The idea was that straight is the natural motion for all earth bound things, not that earth bound things always move straight. Read about Aristotle's theory of motion here: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/GreekScience/Students/Tom/AristotleAstro.html
Medieval intellectuals were not stupid, they just started from some faulty premises. Try reading Aquinas some time. Its not easy stuff. And they did not freely ignore obvious physical phenomena, as can be seen by the complexity of some of the Ptolemaic models of the solar system.
Holy shit, what part of "interpreted" and "virtual" do you people not understand?
For my part none. But that has nothing to do with this.
I cannot "leak" memory from JavaScript any more than I can leak it from Java or C# or Python.
You can leak in any of those. Maybe you should read the link I posted to a definition of memory leak. You seem to think it has to be caused by a c heap management routine for it to be a memory leak. That is simply not the case.
If my "application" is leaking memory then it's the virtual machine's or interpreter's fault, period. Period.
Only according to your narrow definition of memory leak. A virtual machine cannot stop a coder from writing code that will allocate objects and never allow them to be freed.
"Application" maps cleanly to "process" as far as I'm concerned, because that's the memory allocation scope and boundary for most operating systems.
Don't know why I bother since you don't seem to read 'em but here's a definition of application. Nothing about process there. You may find it convenient to equate the two but they are not equivelent.
I wasn't calling you a liar. Just slightly ignorant.
You have too narrow an idea of memory leaks. Read this. Note this part:
In languages providing automatic memory management, like Java, C# or LISP there can be memory leaks too. The memory management does not free an object that is strongly reachable.
You don't need to malloc to leak memory and you certainly can leak memory in javascript.
GMail is not an application. It's a bunch of scripts running in the browser.
You also have too narrow a definition of application. An application is more a matter of user experience. It does not have to be implemented as a process. Calling web based ui talking to scripts on the backend an application is common usage.
You need to get out more. There's a whole world beyond c.
One of the reasons the military is such a driving force in innovation is because, like the space program, they are constantly trying to solve problems at the "extremes".
Another is that they have lots of money. I imagine if we funded the department of education the way we funded the military, we might have all sorts of research grants for building new education tools.
That formulation works alot better if you are a member of the English ruling class than if you are a factory worker. In any case, with all due respect to "Freaks and Geeks", Marx had a somewhat more general formulation:
"The mode of production in material life determines the general character of the social, political, and spiritual processes of life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but on the contrary, it is their social existence which determines consciousness."
My son is autistic. He also has trouble reading and writing, but the software that is most useful to him would likely be useless for someone who is badly dyslexic or Down's syndrome. Knowing the specific diagnosis can actually be quite important when devising treatments. While some diagnosis are just labels slapped on poorly understood symptoms, others convey alot more about the nature of the problem and how it is best treated.
Quit flogging your Haliburton horse, it's long since dead. You are really showing your ignorance.
I didn't mention Haliburton. I also didn't direct my comment to any branch of the government. And no, the issue is not dead. There are alot of questions to be resolved.
That situation is VERY closely monitored by the Government and by the Defense and Government contractor Industry.
Yeah I've something about that. Maybe they should hire more foxes to guard the hen house.
Congress "critters" seem to get around this by not sending the money to a specific company but wording legislation to award $$$ to firms that operate in thier state,
Well thats one example. But there are worse examples....like Bill Tauzin negotiating a job as a lobbyist for the drug industry while serving as chairman of the commitee in charge of overseeing that industry (and crafting the perscription drug bill).
You wanna show a few images of dead Americans or anti-Bush riots? Fine, go ahead. You do it daily without focusing on other topics?
Doesn't sound to me like you've actually seen Al Jazeera. Check it out. You'll find alot more than stories about US atrocities. They may be biased, but no more so than most American news sources. And yes they show pictures of dead Americans. Why? Because Americans ARE dieing, and unlike the US media, they feel no obligation to downplay this.
A LOT of large Chinese corporations have Government insiders in the management of the company, and they siphon off things they think are useful to advance the State.
While in America, government has corporate insiders in the management of the country and they siphon off things they think are useful to advance their company.
As for leaving him in power, well, that was a poor choice on the part of a previous administration.
Current events show how wise a choice that was. A day or two ago Condi Rice said we had encountered unforseen difficulties in Iraq. Bush senior's administration left Saddam in power because they did foresee those difficulties.
The current administration did something about him, but he had so much warning that very few allegations could be proven.
The allegations could not be proven because they were not true. Not even the Bush administration still maintains that Saddam had WMDs at any point after the last gulf war.
No, D-Day occured long after war had officially begun between the US and Germany. Germany declared war on the US on Dec 11, 1941 shortly after US declared war on Japan. D-Day was June 6, 1944.
oh your right, we should leave saddam and every other bad guy in power.
Better than setting out to rid the world of "bad guys". The US's notion of "bad guys" has more than once encompassed elected leaders who didn't have the proper respect for American corporate interests.
Maybe attacking hitler was a bad thing to. What a mistake it was going to WWII. Man you got me there
We didn't attack Hitler. Hitler declared war on us. That aside, I said proceed cautiously, I didn't say never proceed.
Imagine what would have happend if Saddam knew we were going to look for him in the area he got caught? He would have probably moved to a new hole in the ground.
Which would in turn have lead to continued instability in Iraq. There would still be roadside bombings, kidnappings, assasinations...uh...wait a minute!
In the comic book world where the world is troubled by a handful of evil men, doing everything you can to catch them makes sense. In the real world, where many bad things happen in pursuit of good causes, you need to proceed cautiously or you may create evils worse than those you try to solve.
Feminists are part of a political movement, and have leaders that speak on their behalf, representative of all members.
So is conservatism. Does that mean David Duke speaks for all conservatives?
Every political movement has its crackpots. Its a shame that so many people can be mislead into believing that the crackpots' views fairly represents what a movement (any movement) is trying to achieve. Discussion of the real issues often doesn't even occur because it is derailed by these straw-man arguements. .
So, by percieving somebody's statement through your filters, you found something that offended you.
My point is that the poster is either wrong (he meant all, and not all think that) or he is being misleading (he meant some, not all). I gave examples of using that construct with other terms to demonstrate that it is misleading. If you think I'm wrong, say where. Filters? Whats that supposed to mean? And what makes you think I was offended? Are you just assuming I would be because I support feminism?
OK. You can make it be however you want in your head. That doesn't change what the OP SAID.
My point was that by saying "feminsts say..." he either meant: a) "All feminists say..." b) "Most feminists say..." or c) "some feminists say"
If he intended a or b he is factually incorrect, and if he intended c, he is being misleading (for the reasons given in my post). Reading through the original posts again, I guess you are right: I was assuming that c was the case, when he could actually just be ignorant. I thought it didn't need to be spelled out, but maybe it does: those views are fringe views no more indicative of the beliefs of most feminists than white supremacy is of conservatives.
Interestingly, I haven't been able to find a transcript of what this Harvard president ACTUALLY SAID, only what people SAY he said
The times article I read said that transcripts were not made intentionally to allow the participants freedom to speak without fear that their words would be misconstrued by the press. Pretty ironic.
Thats sounds suspiciously like what I read about rules for teachers in New England from the 19th centrury. I'm guessing that the fact that these rules are from 100 years ago got lost somewhere in the telling. Modern anti-discrimination laws would proclude official rules such as those you mention, and make enforcing them unofficially pretty dangerous.
Saying "feminists say..." can reasonably mean "all feminists say..." or "most feminists say..." without being misleading. However, using it when you mean "some feminists say..." is misleading, despite being logically valid. Substitute other subjects to demonstrate: "christians think jews should be killed" "fish are poisonous" " etc. In short, no he's not full of crap. The parent was making misleading statements, and the responder called him on it.
Because every software is scalable to a point, and every marketer adds it in their product description, it is a buzzword.
It may be a buzzword, but it is also a legitimate feature. In my team we've had alot of meetings to find ways to make our product scale better - and they sure as hell weren't marketing meetings. The end result is that our product does scale well, and our sales people rightfully point this out. To say the term should be killed, as did the quote I included in my original post, is just stupid, and demonstrates an inability to tell what is a pure marketing term from what is an overmarketed term.
He longs to see the demise of "scalable," for instance, which is tech lingo for something that can get bigger.
While other things discussed in the article are just plain silly, scalability is a real feature of software. It should be discussed in marketing material, and customers should ask about it if its not. I guess the inability to discern between buzzwords and features extends, beyond marketers and purchasers, to the writer of the article.
I've played the beta. Wish's graphics are actually pretty good. Nothing too exciting, but on par with other mmporgs. Certainly good enough that people who liked the game play would have had no difficulty tolerating them. Remember, for a long time EQ was the most successful US mmporg despite having very outdated graphics.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you sure about that? Medieval theory of motion was based on Aristotle. The idea was that straight is the natural motion for all earth bound things, not that earth bound things always move straight. Read about Aristotle's theory of motion here: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/GreekScience/Students /Tom/AristotleAstro.html
Medieval intellectuals were not stupid, they just started from some faulty premises. Try reading Aquinas some time. Its not easy stuff. And they did not freely ignore obvious physical phenomena, as can be seen by the complexity of some of the Ptolemaic models of the solar system.
Holy shit, what part of "interpreted" and "virtual" do you people not understand?
For my part none. But that has nothing to do with this.
I cannot "leak" memory from JavaScript any more than I can leak it from Java or C# or Python.
You can leak in any of those. Maybe you should read the link I posted to a definition of memory leak. You seem to think it has to be caused by a c heap management routine for it to be a memory leak. That is simply not the case.
If my "application" is leaking memory then it's the virtual machine's or interpreter's fault, period. Period.
Only according to your narrow definition of memory leak. A virtual machine cannot stop a coder from writing code that will allocate objects and never allow them to be freed.
"Application" maps cleanly to "process" as far as I'm concerned, because that's the memory allocation scope and boundary for most operating systems.
Don't know why I bother since you don't seem to read 'em but here's a definition of application. Nothing about process there. You may find it convenient to equate the two but they are not equivelent.
You have too narrow an idea of memory leaks. Read this. Note this part:
You don't need to malloc to leak memory and you certainly can leak memory in javascript.
GMail is not an application. It's a bunch of scripts running in the browser.
You also have too narrow a definition of application. An application is more a matter of user experience. It does not have to be implemented as a process. Calling web based ui talking to scripts on the backend an application is common usage.
You need to get out more. There's a whole world beyond c.
One of the reasons the military is such a driving force in innovation is because, like the space program, they are constantly trying to solve problems at the "extremes".
Another is that they have lots of money. I imagine if we funded the department of education the way we funded the military, we might have all sorts of research grants for building new education tools.
That formulation works alot better if you are a member of the English ruling class than if you are a factory worker. In any case, with all due respect to "Freaks and Geeks", Marx had a somewhat more general formulation:
"The mode of production in material life determines the general character of the social, political, and spiritual processes of life. It is not the consciousness of men that determines their existence, but on the contrary, it is their social existence which determines consciousness."
Cool! My autistic son is struggling with basic math right now. I'll check that out.
My son is autistic. He also has trouble reading and writing, but the software that is most useful to him would likely be useless for someone who is badly dyslexic or Down's syndrome. Knowing the specific diagnosis can actually be quite important when devising treatments. While some diagnosis are just labels slapped on poorly understood symptoms, others convey alot more about the nature of the problem and how it is best treated.
Quit flogging your Haliburton horse, it's long since dead. You are really showing your ignorance.
I didn't mention Haliburton. I also didn't direct my comment to any branch of the government. And no, the issue is not dead. There are alot of questions to be resolved.
That situation is VERY closely monitored by the Government and by the Defense and Government contractor Industry.
Yeah I've something about that. Maybe they should hire more foxes to guard the hen house.
Congress "critters" seem to get around this by not sending the money to a specific company but wording legislation to award $$$ to firms that operate in thier state,
Well thats one example. But there are worse examples....like Bill Tauzin negotiating a job as a lobbyist for the drug industry while serving as chairman of the commitee in charge of overseeing that industry (and crafting the perscription drug bill).
You wanna show a few images of dead Americans or anti-Bush riots? Fine, go ahead. You do it daily without focusing on other topics?
Doesn't sound to me like you've actually seen Al Jazeera. Check it out. You'll find alot more than stories about US atrocities. They may be biased, but no more so than most American news sources. And yes they show pictures of dead Americans. Why? Because Americans ARE dieing, and unlike the US media, they feel no obligation to downplay this.
A LOT of large Chinese corporations have Government insiders in the management of the company, and they siphon off things they think are useful to advance the State.
While in America, government has corporate insiders in the management of the country and they siphon off things they think are useful to advance their company.
I doubt it. The US spends far more per capita on health care than any other country. Almost 3x as much per person as the UK. See here.
Add to that other attractive benefits...like having a staging area for further adventurers.
As for leaving him in power, well, that was a poor choice on the part of a previous administration.
Current events show how wise a choice that was. A day or two ago Condi Rice said we had encountered unforseen difficulties in Iraq. Bush senior's administration left Saddam in power because they did foresee those difficulties.
The current administration did something about him, but he had so much warning that very few allegations could be proven.
The allegations could not be proven because they were not true. Not even the Bush administration still maintains that Saddam had WMDs at any point after the last gulf war.
No, D-Day occured long after war had officially begun between the US and Germany. Germany declared war on the US on Dec 11, 1941 shortly after US declared war on Japan. D-Day was June 6, 1944.
oh your right, we should leave saddam and every other bad guy in power.
Better than setting out to rid the world of "bad guys". The US's notion of "bad guys" has more than once encompassed elected leaders who didn't have the proper respect for American corporate interests.
Maybe attacking hitler was a bad thing to. What a mistake it was going to WWII. Man you got me there
We didn't attack Hitler. Hitler declared war on us. That aside, I said proceed cautiously, I didn't say never proceed.
Imagine what would have happend if Saddam knew we were going to look for him in the area he got caught? He would have probably moved to a new hole in the ground.
Which would in turn have lead to continued instability in Iraq. There would still be roadside bombings, kidnappings, assasinations...uh...wait a minute!
In the comic book world where the world is troubled by a handful of evil men, doing everything you can to catch them makes sense. In the real world, where many bad things happen in pursuit of good causes, you need to proceed cautiously or you may create evils worse than those you try to solve.
Feminists are part of a political movement, and have leaders that speak on their behalf, representative of all members.
So is conservatism. Does that mean David Duke speaks for all conservatives?
Every political movement has its crackpots.
Its a shame that so many people can be mislead into believing that the crackpots' views fairly represents what a movement (any movement) is trying to achieve. Discussion of the real issues often doesn't even occur because it is derailed by these straw-man arguements.
.
So, by percieving somebody's statement through your filters, you found something that offended you.
My point is that the poster is either wrong (he meant all, and not all think that) or he is being misleading (he meant some, not all). I gave examples of using that construct with other terms to demonstrate that it is misleading. If you think I'm wrong, say where. Filters? Whats that supposed to mean? And what makes you think I was offended? Are you just assuming I would be because I support feminism?
OK. You can make it be however you want in your head. That doesn't change what the OP SAID.
My point was that by saying "feminsts say..." he either meant:
a) "All feminists say..."
b) "Most feminists say..."
or c) "some feminists say"
If he intended a or b he is factually incorrect, and if he intended c, he is being misleading (for the reasons given in my post). Reading through the original posts again, I guess you are right: I was assuming that c was the case, when he could actually just be ignorant. I thought it didn't need to be spelled out, but maybe it does: those views are fringe views no more indicative of the beliefs of most feminists than white supremacy is of conservatives.
Interestingly, I haven't been able to find a transcript of what this Harvard president ACTUALLY SAID, only what people SAY he said
The times article I read said that transcripts were not made intentionally to allow the participants freedom to speak without fear that their words would be misconstrued by the press. Pretty ironic.
Thats sounds suspiciously like what I read about rules for teachers in New England from the 19th centrury. I'm guessing that the fact that these rules are from 100 years ago got lost somewhere in the telling. Modern anti-discrimination laws would proclude official rules such as those you mention, and make enforcing them unofficially pretty dangerous.
Saying "feminists say..." can reasonably mean "all feminists say..." or "most feminists say..." without being misleading. However, using it when you mean "some feminists say..." is misleading, despite being logically valid. Substitute other subjects to demonstrate: "christians think jews should be killed" "fish are poisonous" " etc. In short, no he's not full of crap. The parent was making misleading statements, and the responder called him on it.
Because every software is scalable to a point, and every marketer adds it in their product description, it is a buzzword.
It may be a buzzword, but it is also a legitimate feature. In my team we've had alot of meetings to find ways to make our product scale better - and they sure as hell weren't marketing meetings. The end result is that our product does scale well, and our sales people rightfully point this out. To say the term should be killed, as did the quote I included in my original post, is just stupid, and demonstrates an inability to tell what is a pure marketing term from what is an overmarketed term.
You tell HIM to get a life when he is the one actually doing something and you are the one bitching at him on slashdot?
On the contrary...he's finally found an activity that makes bitching on slashdot seem like time well spent.
He longs to see the demise of "scalable," for instance, which is tech lingo for something that can get bigger.
While other things discussed in the article are just plain silly, scalability is a real feature of software. It should be discussed in marketing material, and customers should ask about it if its not. I guess the inability to discern between buzzwords and features extends, beyond marketers and purchasers, to the writer of the article.
I've played the beta. Wish's graphics are actually pretty good. Nothing too exciting, but on par with other mmporgs. Certainly good enough that people who liked the game play would have had no difficulty tolerating them. Remember, for a long time EQ was the most successful US mmporg despite having very outdated graphics.