I've had programming classes where the teacher would specifically spell out EXACTLY how your code should look, such as full nouns for variable names (no abbreviations), and very specific capitalization schemes. Documentation was specified as well.
If you look at most of the code excerpts, they're for basic things like string and integer conversions. Given a classroom full of people, and very specific instructions on what code should look like, you're not going to get much variation.
One would need to look at the rest of the code as well to see if the excerpts from each side are consistent with the rest of the codebase. Does one use "CELL_PADDING" everywhere, but in this snippet they use "CELLPAD"?
I'm no expert coder, but these don't look the same to me. There are similarities, but one would presume they are doing the similar things.
One of the functions is to convert an integer to a level. How many different ways could you do actually do this? Another function converts a string.
If you assign a class to write functions that would change variable types. All 30 people will come up with different code, but the code is likely to look very similar - especially if you're encouraging them to use proper function/variable naming and comments.
Kudos to JBoss for posting the code, but I don't see much here to be suing over.
I don't think it will happen either, but I don't think that's a bad thing.
As computers become more powerful, the interfaces will get more intelligent. An average user could speak to the computer and say something like "Computer, find all the pictures from Sarah's wedding and print thumbnail sheets with 20 pictures per page" or "Computer, I'm having 8 people over for dinner tomorrow. I'd like to make Coq au Vin. Find some good recipies, print them and order what we need from the grocery. Oh, and that Pinot Noir we got last time was a little too dry." or "The president is coming to town tomorrow. Plan an alternate route to work so I can avoid all the traffic blockages."
Sure, a programmer could write specific programs to accomplish things like these. In fact, I'd be hard-pressed to write them myself. It's my belief, though, that I won't need to in the future.
It was a stupid waste of the public's time and money to invest in a system that is so easy to abuse.
It doesn't take much to figure out that people would want to abuse this and the public servants investing in these should have asked, "how easy is this for someone to use without authorization". When the answer is "a $300 IR flashlight" is all you need, they should have rejected it saying, "come back when you have a real product."
This is almost as bad as all the money being spent on the Deibold systems for voting.
I suppose we could build bigger/more sensitive receivers here on Earth to recieve its weakening signal. And we could also build larger transmitters to push a stronger signal back to make sure it can still hear us.
Of course, maybe we'd be better off spending that money on newer probes.
There are multiple kinds of errors. The touch screen that prints a ballot can reduce some, such as:
1) voter accidentally votes for wrong candidate because they found the ballot confusing (multiple languages can be done easily too)
2) malformed ballot - it should prevent voting for multiple candidates, and eliminates problems like dangling chads.
I, for one, think there should be two different machines. One for producing ballots, and one for counting them. They should be totally seperate systems. Sure it costs more, but this is the government, and it's exercising a function even more important than bombing Afghanistan. If the pentagon can have $200 hammers and thousands for toilet seats, we can have multiple voting machines.
I don't mind the 75 cents. I like the features that come with Bigzoo, particularly (God, I hate the names), Pinskip and BlastIt.
Pinskip lets you identify certain phone numbers that do not need to enter your pin. For example, your cellphone or home phone number. Call Bigzoo, and it chirps up immediately with "please enter the number you'd like to call". BlastIt is a "speed-dial", though it's a bit clunky.
I would caution against putting your work/dorm number in Pinskip, though, if you have to go through a PBX that does not provide your actual phone number. I worked at a university and put in my work number. Some lucky student got to call their boyfriend back-home for about 3 hours on my dime.
The only other thing I'd like to see at Bigzoo is the ability to register your credit card and have it automatically bill a fixed amount when your balance reaches a certain level. My prepaid cellphone does that, and I think it's great!
We already have "car-sharing" programs, and this could take it a step farther.
Instead of driving the car to work and leaving it in a parking lot all day, the car could spend the day running errands for other people. Not everyone would need to buy a car and those who do could chose to lease them into this system.
Sure, Americans like the freedom of driving down the road wherever and whenever they want. We also don't like being pressed in with a bunch of other people. Given a choice between an hour alone in our cars or an hour stuffed in a train or bus, most Americans will choose the car.
In my personal case, the mass-transit option takes more than an hour to get to and from work. I can make the drive in 15 minutes. Working an hourly job, the hour of commuting time saved more than pays for my parking costs.
It has to come from some manager's budget... he definitely won't be getting a bonus.
Plus, they most likely did not get $780,000 in returns from those calls. A part of the business that is bleeding money, with no real anticipated return is likely to be cut off.
My question has been, "why do we we need to have one machine to do it all"? Why not two? One for producing a ballot, and another for counting.
If Election 2000 is the impetus for change, we need to consider the actual problem. The problem wasn't counting the ballots, not really. It was the quality of the ballots was questionable and caused problems with counting.
While it's inefficient, we should preserve the current seperation of voting and counting. A voting machine should assist the voter in producing a "perfect" and readable ballot. That ballot should be put anonymously in the box. Those ballots should be counted later by another machine.
Carr's undoing began when an FBI agent in the Norfolk, Virginia field office received one of her e-mails in February, 2001, and launched an investigation.
Do you think anyone at the FBI would listen if you, an ordinary tax-paying citizen, called to report the same e-mail? They'd probably laugh and tell you that they were busy fighting *real* terrorists.
I'm not sure what you're implying by "between 1st and 3rd", but it's important to remember that the numbers of the ammendemnts is due to order of acceptance, not a ranking of importance.
The first ammendment does not have primacy over the others because it is first. It was simply the first ammendment accepted. If I remember correctly, it was the 2nd proposed, but only the first accepted.
"Alpha children wear grey They work much harder than we do, because they're so frightfully clever. I'm really awfuly glad I'm a Beta, because I don't work so hard."
There just aren't enough marines and SF guys out there to do the boring "country occupation" missions.
Plus, it would be a waste of their advanced training to have them doing such mundane work.
The Marines are small (in number), but much more elite - they can afford to take only the best. If you eliminated the Army and wanted to expand the marines to compensate, the Marines would be diminished because they would no longer be able to be as selective and elite.
Oh come-on! EVERYONE knows that the Danish government is in Daneland, just like the Scotish government is in Scotland and the Irish government is in Ireland. If there was this place "Denmark", clearly, the government would Denmarky or Denmarkan.
Silly Europeans! Too bad you don't have an education system like us Americans!
There's a big difference between continuous monitoring of speed and knowing the speed when a crash happens.
For some reason, the privacy advocate in me seems to feel okay about the latter. An crash has happened, and all data should be used to determinethe cause.
But, I severely chafe against the idea of a system that continuously monitors speed and reports my driving habits to some authority.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't forget the claymores! Lots of power in a small package! Fun for the whole family!
I've had programming classes where the teacher would specifically spell out EXACTLY how your code should look, such as full nouns for variable names (no abbreviations), and very specific capitalization schemes. Documentation was specified as well.
If you look at most of the code excerpts, they're for basic things like string and integer conversions. Given a classroom full of people, and very specific instructions on what code should look like, you're not going to get much variation.
One would need to look at the rest of the code as well to see if the excerpts from each side are consistent with the rest of the codebase. Does one use "CELL_PADDING" everywhere, but in this snippet they use "CELLPAD"?
I'm no expert coder, but these don't look the same to me. There are similarities, but one would presume they are doing the similar things.
One of the functions is to convert an integer to a level. How many different ways could you do actually do this? Another function converts a string.
If you assign a class to write functions that would change variable types. All 30 people will come up with different code, but the code is likely to look very similar - especially if you're encouraging them to use proper function/variable naming and comments.
Kudos to JBoss for posting the code, but I don't see much here to be suing over.
I don't think it will happen either, but I don't think that's a bad thing.
As computers become more powerful, the interfaces will get more intelligent. An average user could speak to the computer and say something like "Computer, find all the pictures from Sarah's wedding and print thumbnail sheets with 20 pictures per page" or "Computer, I'm having 8 people over for dinner tomorrow. I'd like to make Coq au Vin. Find some good recipies, print them and order what we need from the grocery. Oh, and that Pinot Noir we got last time was a little too dry." or "The president is coming to town tomorrow. Plan an alternate route to work so I can avoid all the traffic blockages."
Sure, a programmer could write specific programs to accomplish things like these. In fact, I'd be hard-pressed to write them myself. It's my belief, though, that I won't need to in the future.
I probably watched too much Star Trek as a kid!
It was a stupid waste of the public's time and money to invest in a system that is so easy to abuse.
It doesn't take much to figure out that people would want to abuse this and the public servants investing in these should have asked, "how easy is this for someone to use without authorization". When the answer is "a $300 IR flashlight" is all you need, they should have rejected it saying, "come back when you have a real product."
This is almost as bad as all the money being spent on the Deibold systems for voting.
I suppose we could build bigger/more sensitive receivers here on Earth to recieve its weakening signal. And we could also build larger transmitters to push a stronger signal back to make sure it can still hear us.
Of course, maybe we'd be better off spending that money on newer probes.
Either way, it's above my pay grade.
There are multiple kinds of errors. The touch screen that prints a ballot can reduce some, such as:
1) voter accidentally votes for wrong candidate because they found the ballot confusing (multiple languages can be done easily too)
2) malformed ballot - it should prevent voting for multiple candidates, and eliminates problems like dangling chads.
I, for one, think there should be two different machines. One for producing ballots, and one for counting them. They should be totally seperate systems. Sure it costs more, but this is the government, and it's exercising a function even more important than bombing Afghanistan. If the pentagon can have $200 hammers and thousands for toilet seats, we can have multiple voting machines.
I don't mind the 75 cents. I like the features that come with Bigzoo, particularly (God, I hate the names), Pinskip and BlastIt.
Pinskip lets you identify certain phone numbers that do not need to enter your pin. For example, your cellphone or home phone number. Call Bigzoo, and it chirps up immediately with "please enter the number you'd like to call". BlastIt is a "speed-dial", though it's a bit clunky.
I would caution against putting your work/dorm number in Pinskip, though, if you have to go through a PBX that does not provide your actual phone number. I worked at a university and put in my work number. Some lucky student got to call their boyfriend back-home for about 3 hours on my dime.
The only other thing I'd like to see at Bigzoo is the ability to register your credit card and have it automatically bill a fixed amount when your balance reaches a certain level. My prepaid cellphone does that, and I think it's great!
The manufacturers won't make much money that way. How will they pay their bribes..er uh, political campaign contributions?
Nero isn't fiddling while Rome burns, he is helping light the fires
Nero's also burning the copies of my friend's CDs... I guess he's not all bad!
We already have "car-sharing" programs, and this could take it a step farther.
Instead of driving the car to work and leaving it in a parking lot all day, the car could spend the day running errands for other people. Not everyone would need to buy a car and those who do could chose to lease them into this system.
Sure, Americans like the freedom of driving down the road wherever and whenever they want. We also don't like being pressed in with a bunch of other people. Given a choice between an hour alone in our cars or an hour stuffed in a train or bus, most Americans will choose the car.
In my personal case, the mass-transit option takes more than an hour to get to and from work. I can make the drive in 15 minutes. Working an hourly job, the hour of commuting time saved more than pays for my parking costs.
It has to come from some manager's budget... he definitely won't be getting a bonus.
Plus, they most likely did not get $780,000 in returns from those calls. A part of the business that is bleeding money, with no real anticipated return is likely to be cut off.
dyslexic chads maybe....
Right, but LA OGRE was not a candidate....
Wait, maybe he was!
My question has been, "why do we we need to have one machine to do it all"? Why not two? One for producing a ballot, and another for counting.
If Election 2000 is the impetus for change, we need to consider the actual problem. The problem wasn't counting the ballots, not really. It was the quality of the ballots was questionable and caused problems with counting.
While it's inefficient, we should preserve the current seperation of voting and counting. A voting machine should assist the voter in producing a "perfect" and readable ballot. That ballot should be put anonymously in the box. Those ballots should be counted later by another machine.
I don't know what it is with our mayor and covering things.
Yes, we're covering the reservoir, but only to build a pond on top of it. It's brilliant! Better than building a cover over the freeway (I-405)!
Maybe we can build a cover over PGE park and put a new stadium on top of that!
I think that is the case. From the article:
Carr's undoing began when an FBI agent in the Norfolk, Virginia field office received one of her e-mails in February, 2001, and launched an investigation.
Do you think anyone at the FBI would listen if you, an ordinary tax-paying citizen, called to report the same e-mail? They'd probably laugh and tell you that they were busy fighting *real* terrorists.
This is very interesting, so I only say this a bit tongue-and-cheek...
If your model does not predict poplution crashes, and there are, in fact, population crashes, you have problem. Your model is not very good.
You have two choices... change your model, or exterminate the subject of your model and get rid of all the evidence...
I'm not sure what you're implying by "between 1st and 3rd", but it's important to remember that the numbers of the ammendemnts is due to order of acceptance, not a ranking of importance.
The first ammendment does not have primacy over the others because it is first. It was simply the first ammendment accepted. If I remember correctly, it was the 2nd proposed, but only the first accepted.
That reminds me of something...
"Alpha children wear grey They work much harder than we do, because they're so frightfully clever. I'm really awfuly glad I'm a Beta, because I don't work so hard."
Ahh, life is good as a Beta!
There just aren't enough marines and SF guys out there to do the boring "country occupation" missions.
Plus, it would be a waste of their advanced training to have them doing such mundane work.
The Marines are small (in number), but much more elite - they can afford to take only the best. If you eliminated the Army and wanted to expand the marines to compensate, the Marines would be diminished because they would no longer be able to be as selective and elite.
I'm relatively sure only one of you is correct!
Oh come-on! EVERYONE knows that the Danish government is in Daneland, just like the Scotish government is in Scotland and the Irish government is in Ireland. If there was this place "Denmark", clearly, the government would Denmarky or Denmarkan.
Silly Europeans! Too bad you don't have an education system like us Americans!
There's a big difference between continuous monitoring of speed and knowing the speed when a crash happens.
For some reason, the privacy advocate in me seems to feel okay about the latter. An crash has happened, and all data should be used to determinethe cause.
But, I severely chafe against the idea of a system that continuously monitors speed and reports my driving habits to some authority.
That's why I always get the boxed sets with processors. Sure it costs more, but it sure is worth a lot of piece of mind.
TCO is dead. Long live ROI!
Isn't the TCO part of the ROI?
I mean.. for an accurate appraisal of the return on the investment, you have to determine what that investment and its related costs are.
Please provide some links showing how these are calculated differently. Thanks!