nobody watched it because fox wouldn't let them. it was constantly pre-empted, rescheduled, and shown out of order to boot. from the very beginning fox seemed to do everything they could to ensure nobody could watch it, even if they tried.
It's actually incredibly shallow. It's something I might recommend to kids as "my first SF novel" but that's about it.
ender's game might make an okay movie, but then modern movies - especially SF - are not particularly known for being cerebral masterpieces.
There's much better SF out there than enders game. For instance, any of the known space stuff by Niven. Greg Bear. Asimov. Herbert. Clarke. Those are great SF writers. OSC is a novice hack by comparison. He can write decently enough, but his stories are shallow, he telegraphs events light-years off, and story development is as subtle as being clubbed over the head with a baseball bat.
i'd really much rather see a larry niven or greg bear movie than an osc one.
There are many great SF stories out there, ender's game is not one of them.
The main reason why ender's game is popular (especially among children) is that it appeals mightily to teen angst. So many kids claim they "identify" with ender, it is truly disturbing.
Naughty Dog software pointed out that macros can make code written by other developers harder to understand. It's interesting that while C/C++ developers generally use macros sparingly (and those who use them a lot are generally frowned upon), Lisp macros are promoted as if it's the only way to get anything useful done with the language.
It's also interesting that those who do use Lisp in applications tend to use it as glue/scripting and not as the base.
Doubtful. Haskell has really taken off in comparison, while Lisp continues to flounder.
Maybe instead of whining how everyone is "too stupid" to "get" the "leetness" of Lisp, they should focus on why so many people are turned off by the language and choose other functional languages instead.
Perhaps the "everything is a nail" attitude of Lisp fanatics has something to do with it?
annual replacement? good lord, what in the world were you writing to them? constant 20 writes/sec?
under "normal" usage with wear leveling, your average compactflash should last something like 10 years. if you mount non-critical temp stuff to eg a tmpfs, you can reduce writes to almost zero.
microdrives have never had a good reputation for reliablility. i'd be seriously concerned about using them in embedded systems where you managed to trash the flash in a year.
Modern flash is quite sophisticated (at least compactflash and USB sticks are, no idea about SD/MMC)
Not only does modern flash have multiple redundancies and ECC, it also has wear leveling and badblock reallocation. This is all completely transparent to the end user / operating system.
IOW, there is no need for the OS or filesystem to handle any of this.
And yes, the flash is larger than advertised for exactly these reasons. So are your hard drives (IDE, SCSI) which have similar features and have similarly reserved space.
So why has lisp largely failed to get any traction? There's >10x as many freshmeat projects in python than lisp. More ruby than lisp. Lisp is there toward the bottom with cobol and fortran.
it's not like lisp isn't taught in CS classes. people do get exposure to it. so why don't programmers stick with it?
doesn't matter how damn cool your language is if nobody uses it.
the sunlight direction is coming from the bottom (the circles are craters) for your assumption they are welding-line-ish material deposited on the surface, the sunlight would have to be from the top, and all the circles would have to be raised bumps -- and there would be no craters on this surface at all (with your assumption and lighting from the top, there are no craters -- only raised bumps).
the cpu (amd/intel) is the single largest power consumer in modern laptops. the multi-platter HD will eat 5W-10W, network card a few W, the LCD panel with backlight maybe 10W. the CPU will eat several times all those components combined.
ELF anyone? It's stood the test of time very well.
How about OpenGL?
specs are fine as long as they are forward-looking. ELF and OpenGL are examples of both which have been wildly successful and have managed to grow with time just fine, thank you very much.
there are many more examples. just because a few specs might suck doesn't mean all specs suck.
the opteron has a much better FSB than intel right now, especially when you go dualcore. also, amd has traditionally been better at FP than intel ever since the first athlons. on top of that, intel's intense focus on deep pipelines to crank the mhz means that branch prediction misses kill performance. all these add up to opterons being much better bang/$ than the equivalent intel gear.
yes, amd's power consumption still sucks comparatively, but they're slowly getting better.
and tbh when you compare xeon to opteron, opteron wins hands down performance wise for the same power/heat. and still wins on price/performance.
Suddenly, it looks absolutely not "artificial" and a whole lot like a fault line. You can even see a bunch of other smaller/thinner lines in the image. The "buried" object looks irregular, with absolutely no sharp definition or straight lines at all. Looks like just an oddly eroded area.
why does an oil-rich nation so desperately need nuclear power?
iran has the second largest proven reserves in the world (132 billion barrels). this is nearly a century of proven reserves, though the number is increasing regularly due to discoveries of new deposits in iran (it increased 30% for example since 2003).
Slashdot Mirror
I 100% agree with you.
my summary of why ender's game is ok but not great can be summed up here.
i can think of a lot better sf that deserves the big screen treatment a lot more than ender's game.
nobody watched the show.
nobody watched it because fox wouldn't let them. it was constantly pre-empted, rescheduled, and shown out of order to boot. from the very beginning fox seemed to do everything they could to ensure nobody could watch it, even if they tried.
It's actually incredibly shallow. It's something I might recommend to kids as "my first SF novel" but that's about it.
ender's game might make an okay movie, but then modern movies - especially SF - are not particularly known for being cerebral masterpieces.
There's much better SF out there than enders game. For instance, any of the known space stuff by Niven. Greg Bear. Asimov. Herbert. Clarke. Those are great SF writers. OSC is a novice hack by comparison. He can write decently enough, but his stories are shallow, he telegraphs events light-years off, and story development is as subtle as being clubbed over the head with a baseball bat.
i'd really much rather see a larry niven or greg bear movie than an osc one.
ender's game is a mediocre story, I felt that way about ender's game long before I ever found out he was a fascist asshat.
i've written about this several times before.
There are many great SF stories out there, ender's game is not one of them.
The main reason why ender's game is popular (especially among children) is that it appeals mightily to teen angst. So many kids claim they "identify" with ender, it is truly disturbing.
Why should you "just need to learn how to use the editor properly" in order to use a language?
I think it's worth noting that while there's only 3 real dialects of C (C, C++, ObjC) there's something like 30 or more dialects of Lisp.
Naughty Dog software pointed out that macros can make code written by other developers harder to understand. It's interesting that while C/C++ developers generally use macros sparingly (and those who use them a lot are generally frowned upon), Lisp macros are promoted as if it's the only way to get anything useful done with the language.
It's also interesting that those who do use Lisp in applications tend to use it as glue/scripting and not as the base.
Doubtful. Haskell has really taken off in comparison, while Lisp continues to flounder.
Maybe instead of whining how everyone is "too stupid" to "get" the "leetness" of Lisp, they should focus on why so many people are turned off by the language and choose other functional languages instead.
Perhaps the "everything is a nail" attitude of Lisp fanatics has something to do with it?
annual replacement? good lord, what in the world were you writing to them? constant 20 writes/sec?
under "normal" usage with wear leveling, your average compactflash should last something like 10 years. if you mount non-critical temp stuff to eg a tmpfs, you can reduce writes to almost zero.
microdrives have never had a good reputation for reliablility. i'd be seriously concerned about using them in embedded systems where you managed to trash the flash in a year.
Yes, on all counts.
Modern flash is quite sophisticated (at least compactflash and USB sticks are, no idea about SD/MMC)
Not only does modern flash have multiple redundancies and ECC, it also has wear leveling and badblock reallocation. This is all completely transparent to the end user / operating system.
IOW, there is no need for the OS or filesystem to handle any of this.
And yes, the flash is larger than advertised for exactly these reasons. So are your hard drives (IDE, SCSI) which have similar features and have similarly reserved space.
So why has lisp largely failed to get any traction? There's >10x as many freshmeat projects in python than lisp. More ruby than lisp. Lisp is there toward the bottom with cobol and fortran.
it's not like lisp isn't taught in CS classes. people do get exposure to it. so why don't programmers stick with it?
doesn't matter how damn cool your language is if nobody uses it.
the sunlight direction is coming from the bottom (the circles are craters) for your assumption they are welding-line-ish material deposited on the surface, the sunlight would have to be from the top, and all the circles would have to be raised bumps -- and there would be no craters on this surface at all (with your assumption and lighting from the top, there are no craters -- only raised bumps).
Actually, a better analogy would be: Python is perl which doesn't suck.
Perl being what you get when you take C, awk and bourne shell and drop it in a blender.
python is perl with syntax which doesn't suck.
if they would get rid of the parenthesis hell, a lot more people would be receptive to lisp.
... hell :)
you shouldn't need an editor to assist you with the syntax hell of a language. paren hell also makes restructuring code
the cpu (amd/intel) is the single largest power consumer in modern laptops. the multi-platter HD will eat 5W-10W, network card a few W, the LCD panel with backlight maybe 10W. the CPU will eat several times all those components combined.
Python is a spiritual descendant of LISP? Python is more like the spiritual antithesis of LISP. Guido hates LISP.
...this is obviously stolen SCO intellectual property.
I mean if SCO can claim all your ELF are belong to SCO, why stop there?
SCO needs to start up a Lisp licensing program, it can be as wildly successful as their Linux licensing program.
looks quite clearly like a groove to me.
keep in mind most features on that image are depressions, not raised bumps.
the lines are quite clearly depressions, not bumps.
ELF anyone? It's stood the test of time very well.
How about OpenGL?
specs are fine as long as they are forward-looking. ELF and OpenGL are examples of both which have been wildly successful and have managed to grow with time just fine, thank you very much.
there are many more examples. just because a few specs might suck doesn't mean all specs suck.
ELF is a very detailed spec which has worked pretty well and stood the test of time. I definitely wouldn't say it's useless.
OpenGL is also a pretty detailed spec which has stood up pretty well. It's also far from useless.
For every example of a "failed" spec, I can give a glowing example of a wildly successful one.
I think he means that quake3 was a VM. the gamecode proper ran bytecode in a virtual "os" presented to it by quake3.
the opteron has a much better FSB than intel right now, especially when you go dualcore. also, amd has traditionally been better at FP than intel ever since the first athlons. on top of that, intel's intense focus on deep pipelines to crank the mhz means that branch prediction misses kill performance. all these add up to opterons being much better bang/$ than the equivalent intel gear.
yes, amd's power consumption still sucks comparatively, but they're slowly getting better.
and tbh when you compare xeon to opteron, opteron wins hands down performance wise for the same power/heat. and still wins on price/performance.
Try this image.
Suddenly, it looks absolutely not "artificial" and a whole lot like a fault line. You can even see a bunch of other smaller/thinner lines in the image. The "buried" object looks irregular, with absolutely no sharp definition or straight lines at all. Looks like just an oddly eroded area.
why does an oil-rich nation so desperately need nuclear power?
iran has the second largest proven reserves in the world (132 billion barrels). this is nearly a century of proven reserves, though the number is increasing regularly due to discoveries of new deposits in iran (it increased 30% for example since 2003).