it's easy to overwhelm it with a lot of cheap countermeasures.
Yes, but doing so (destroying another nation's militaty installation) would be an act of war that you wouldn't want to do unles you were damn sure the war was coming anyway.
So you'd usually still be vulnerable to a first strike.
The second wasn't that bad. The acting was terrible, and a few other things could have been better, but basically it was still a proper Star Wars movie.
The first was a huge, embarrassing, computer-animated steaming turd from beginning to end (although that last expression is a bit misleading, as it might be construed to imply there was some sense of direction in it), and anyone who doesn't see that is just... just..., well just plain wrong. So there. Glad we cleared that up.
Which gets me wondering: say you can see in someone's window, but the view is not very interesting: you only see a section of wall; everything else in the room is out of view. But: there is a CRT TV on in that room, and you can see its reflected light on the wall.
How much information can you gather from that reflected light?
You could of course recinstruct the image on the CRT, but that's not very interesting. The TV does not scan a focused image on its surroundings like the projector does, so you couldn't get a TVs-eye view of the room witht eh same technique.
OTOH, it is clear that from sampling even just a single point on the wall, you could get a silhouette of anything occlusion over the screen seen from that point. At least provided you had a pure white image on the CRT, OR knew what image was on and could calibrate for it.
How far could you get with all the information escaping the window in your direction?
First of all, such regulations are not there to manipulate the market, they are made to insure the state's legitimate and legally required need for long-term document preservation. This should really ahve ruled out proprietary soon-to-be-unsupported formats that have no published spec from day one. Policymakers were a little slow to realize the implications of document obsolescence, but are finally catching on. The fact that openness-regulations levels the playing field just a little is just a bonus.
Secondly: Standard formats enhance free competition, they don't hinder it. It's not like Microsoft are unable to implement the open formats, or publish their own and have those ratified, and then go about competing at making the best applications for authoring them. They can and they should, and the only reason they don't is because they don't like competition.
Regulations like these do not favor OSS unduly, they just slightly weaken MS's anti-competitive lock-in strategy.
Depends on how many governments pass laws requiring public records to be in open well-specify formats so it will be possible to reaqd them in the future (as the bloody well should)
Intellegent design does not mean it was God who did it. Does not say who did it just that some intellegance did it.
That's just because they're not being honest. They all actually believe God did it. There's simply no other reason to adopt such a hackneyed theory to the extent that you feel you have to prevent eveloution from being taught in schools.
Don't attack it based on how religious organizations use the theory but on it's merits
It has no merits as a scientific theory, and the religious thing is the only thing it's ever used for, and its sole reason for existence.
I'm not saying [evolution] isn't true but as it is stated and follwed, there are many flaws.
No there aren't. It doesn't claim to be the comlpete and final answer, it claims to be the furthest and most likely we can see so far from available evidence. ID does not even come close to fulfilling that criteria.
More realistically, they have more than enough trade power to cripple the US economy several times over.
Problem is, peaceful means like trade sanctions won't work against the US. They have a tradition of treating any action not in the best interest of US industry as a direct offense against their country, and respond with bombs (if think they can win). So you need the military upper hand as well if you're going to get anywhere.
But do not forget to rewrite all the comments after you have written to code to tell what it actually do.
I'd rather recommend adjusting them along the way, not afterwards. But yes, of course they ned to evolve with the code. Where sensible I try to change them just before making the change, so the altered comment works as a micro-spec for the task at hand.
If you are from the "Just plan before what you will have to write"-team,
Not at all. But I do believe in dividing work (including changes) into small tasks, and forcing myself to formulate for each one what it really is I intend to do. Often catch a few surprises at that stage too. But as an onging part of coding, not something done at the start.
Here's my simple and easy recipe for ensuring compact intelligent comments, without feeling like extra work, and with the added bonus of helping you think more clearly:
Write the comments first.
Use several short, separate comments to sketch out a general plan (think "extremely rough pseudocode" / "table of contents") of how the section or change you're working on should work. Then fill in the actual implemntation code under each comment, leaving the comments in place.
That way your become a helpful planning and focusing tool, rather than a chore for the benefit of others. And it pretty much ensures you're left with comments that actually say the stuff a reader wants to know (like the purpouse of stuff).
If that still sounds like extra work, you should probebly start thinking through your code a bit more before you start typing in any case.
What does it mean when the two most instrusive web browser plugin makers merge?
Probably that the next version of the flash plugin will take 15 minutes to fire up, just like everything else from Adobe, and that during that time your system will be too bogged down to respond to "back" or "close" or anyting else, so you'll finally have time to read all those paper publications again.
The gnostic gospels and several other old christian texts have been known for ages, and some of them do differ quite a bit from most the established interpretations of the new testament. They have not been covered up; you can buy them anywhere with a good selection in religious texts. They're just not accepted as gospel by the major churches.
No different from older fluorescent lights, which also had only a few sharp peaks i the spectrum.
Also, the solution has been proposed since people first talked seriously about led lighting: a main fluoreschen led for a continous spectrum, and extra colored LEDs to add accent to it. Most people don't care about being able to light their living room in pure green.
It's our little revenge for all those boneheaded forms where, even after you specify a small european country from a list provided, it still requires state to be filled in, and that post code and phone numbers are in US format.
"paying to see" includes renting movies too. Downloading with very strict DRM could be made to seem very similar, and done ringht it might even be a vastly better deal to the average customer. You don't expect to be able to "back up" or copy a rented movie, or at leat you don't expect any respect for your wish to do so, because it was never meant to be yours to keep in the first place.
Sure, there's a market for permanent sale of movies as well, but it's not as dominant as with music, where 'rented' or 'pay-per-play' schemes will just get laughs from most people.
All the nerds with jobs will be there, those in the US will be burger flippers (*) or on the street, and Slashdot's future audience will be over in India.
This will in turn reduce productivity in India so much that America becomes competitive again! Brilliant!
Slashdot Mirror
See also "worldwind" from NASA.
it's easy to overwhelm it with a lot of cheap countermeasures.
Yes, but doing so (destroying another nation's militaty installation) would be an act of war that you wouldn't want to do unles you were damn sure the war was coming anyway.
So you'd usually still be vulnerable to a first strike.
A deity would be something that allowed for the existence of the ants, not someone mindlessly screwing with them
Exactly. Now, if you instead found a way to mindlessly torture them for eternity for not worshipping you, then we're talking.
If you have trouble finding porn on the net these days, I don't think anyone can help you.
You can do it because you 100% want to (OSS), or because you 100% get paid (commercial)
Was I the only one who read those "100%"s asd "totally"? Yeah, dude.
The first two weren't THAT bad!
The second wasn't that bad. The acting was terrible, and a few other things could have been better, but basically it was still a proper Star Wars movie.
The first was a huge, embarrassing, computer-animated steaming turd from beginning to end (although that last expression is a bit misleading, as it might be construed to imply there was some sense of direction in it), and anyone who doesn't see that is just... just..., well just plain wrong. So there. Glad we cleared that up.
Which gets me wondering: say you can see in someone's window, but the view is not very interesting: you only see a section of wall; everything else in the room is out of view. But: there is a CRT TV on in that room, and you can see its reflected light on the wall.
How much information can you gather from that reflected light?
You could of course recinstruct the image on the CRT, but that's not very interesting.
The TV does not scan a focused image on its surroundings like the projector does, so you couldn't get a TVs-eye view of the room witht eh same technique.
OTOH, it is clear that from sampling even just a single point on the wall, you could get a silhouette of anything occlusion over the screen seen from that point. At least provided you had a pure white image on the CRT, OR knew what image was on and could calibrate for it.
How far could you get with all the information escaping the window in your direction?
Could I image my hot neighbour's bedroom and see her make out in her bed from the perspective of her bedroom's ceiling light ? That would be killer ;)
No, that would be stalker. Still pretty bad, but not quite up to murder.
I don't see any contradiction at all.
First of all, such regulations are not there to manipulate the market, they are made to insure the state's legitimate and legally required need for long-term document preservation. This should really ahve ruled out proprietary soon-to-be-unsupported formats that have no published spec from day one. Policymakers were a little slow to realize the implications of document obsolescence, but are finally catching on. The fact that openness-regulations levels the playing field just a little is just a bonus.
Secondly: Standard formats enhance free competition, they don't hinder it. It's not like Microsoft are unable to implement the open formats, or publish their own and have those ratified, and then go about competing at making the best applications for authoring them. They can and they should, and the only reason they don't is because they don't like competition.
Regulations like these do not favor OSS unduly, they just slightly weaken MS's anti-competitive lock-in strategy.
Depends on how many governments pass laws requiring public records to be in open well-specify formats so it will be possible to reaqd them in the future (as the bloody well should)
Intellegent design does not mean it was God who did it. Does not say who did it just that some intellegance did it.
That's just because they're not being honest. They all actually believe God did it. There's simply no other reason to adopt such a hackneyed theory to the extent that you feel you have to prevent eveloution from being taught in schools.
Don't attack it based on how religious organizations use the theory but on it's merits
It has no merits as a scientific theory, and the religious thing is the only thing it's ever used for, and its sole reason for existence.
I'm not saying [evolution] isn't true but as it is stated and follwed, there are many flaws.
No there aren't. It doesn't claim to be the comlpete and final answer, it claims to be the furthest and most likely we can see so far from available evidence. ID does not even come close to fulfilling that criteria.
More realistically, they have more than enough trade power to cripple the US economy several times over.
Problem is, peaceful means like trade sanctions won't work against the US. They have a tradition of treating any action not in the best interest of US industry as a direct offense against their country, and respond with bombs (if think they can win). So you need the military upper hand as well if you're going to get anywhere.
But do not forget to rewrite all the comments after you have written to code to tell what it actually do.
I'd rather recommend adjusting them along the way, not afterwards. But yes, of course they ned to evolve with the code. Where sensible I try to change them just before making the change, so the altered comment works as a micro-spec for the task at hand.
If you are from the "Just plan before what you will have to write"-team,
Not at all. But I do believe in dividing work (including changes) into small tasks, and forcing myself to formulate for each one what it really is I intend to do. Often catch a few surprises at that stage too. But as an onging part of coding, not something done at the start.
Here's my simple and easy recipe for ensuring compact intelligent comments, without feeling like extra work, and with the added bonus of helping you think more clearly:
Write the comments first.
Use several short, separate comments to sketch out a general plan (think "extremely rough pseudocode" / "table of contents") of how the section or change you're working on should work. Then fill in the actual implemntation code under each comment, leaving the comments in place.
That way your become a helpful planning and focusing tool, rather than a chore for the benefit of others. And it pretty much ensures you're left with comments that actually say the stuff a reader wants to know (like the purpouse of stuff).
If that still sounds like extra work, you should probebly start thinking through your code a bit more before you start typing in any case.
What does it mean when the two most instrusive web browser plugin makers merge?
Probably that the next version of the flash plugin will take 15 minutes to fire up, just like everything else from Adobe, and that during that time your system will be too bogged down to respond to "back" or "close" or anyting else, so you'll finally have time to read all those paper publications again.
The gnostic gospels and several other old christian texts have been known for ages, and some of them do differ quite a bit from most the established interpretations of the new testament. They have not been covered up; you can buy them anywhere with a good selection in religious texts. They're just not accepted as gospel by the major churches.
No different from older fluorescent lights, which also had only a few sharp peaks i the spectrum.
Also, the solution has been proposed since people first talked seriously about led lighting: a main fluoreschen led for a continous spectrum, and extra colored LEDs to add accent to it. Most people don't care about being able to light their living room in pure green.
It was a joke. Misinterpreting "FTA" as "Fuck the article".
FTA...
Yeah? Well F you too!
It's our little revenge for all those boneheaded forms where, even after you specify a small european country from a list provided, it still requires state to be filled in, and that post code and phone numbers are in US format.
"paying to see" includes renting movies too.
Downloading with very strict DRM could be made to seem very similar, and done ringht it might even be a vastly better deal to the average customer.
You don't expect to be able to "back up" or copy a rented movie, or at leat you don't expect any respect for your wish to do so, because it was never meant to be yours to keep in the first place.
Sure, there's a market for permanent sale of movies as well, but it's not as dominant as with music, where 'rented' or 'pay-per-play' schemes will just get laughs from most people.
Not necessarily. Unlike music, people are already used to paying to see (not own) movies.
Of course, there are exceptions: MMX and its span, etc.
Ever hear about GPUs?
I do hate it when someone takes it on themselves to speak for everyone
We all do.
All the nerds with jobs will be there, those in the US will be burger flippers (*) or on the street, and Slashdot's future audience will be over in India.
This will in turn reduce productivity in India so much that America becomes competitive again! Brilliant!