The answer is to develop social feedback loops and an environment in which people generally/do not want to blow each other up/.
Of course that sort of long term solution requires much more persistence, humility, dedication and sacrifice than packing lots of explosives into a bomb and just dropping it on people you don't like.
I think we are starting to see this, even/without/ massive nano or biological weapon proliferation.
If you have enough "AK-47 proliferation" it doesn't matter how many bombs you drop.
Yes, CLR was intended (at least by Microsoft's design) to pre-compile (would that be Just Before Time compiler?) before running. In reality both are possible, and Mono does also have a pure interpreter. Some optimizations are actually better made on a running process that can be dynamically profiled ("hotspot"). One gripe I do have about Java is that it does not appear to at least cache these learned optimizations, so every time you start a Java app, it basically has to relearn the optimizations (not an issue on server apps, mostly for desktop apps). I don't know what Mono's implementation does as far as optimization.
Note that GCJ is another alternative that natively compiles bytecode.
"The problem inherent with one-time passwords and TAN schemes is that people print them out and stick them on their monitor with a post-it."
What is the utility of doing that since they are ONE TIME. Why would you ever want to post it up after it was used once? Presumably they are "scratch off" so merely putting the booklet up won't make it obvious what the passwords actually are. And then they STILL need your real password first.
It won't happen. There are already Java language forks that offer enhancements, but the vast vast majority of Java developers use "standard" Java, not one of these screwbal forks. In fact, being open source might make it LESS prone to forking because people can now integrate into a common base instead of forking.
That is a good idea and living in a university town a lot of people do that. But the land value anywhere within practical cycling range of almost any city is very high, so you will be lucky if you can afford your house.
I'm surprised at the number of 12.5 gallons a year per acre. That indeed seems meagre.
I'm not suggesting that we don't also need to fundamentally change the weight of our cars and how we travel. That's a lifestyle change that's harder to sell.
As far as $4.00/gal fuel. It's our own damn fault if we have fooled ourselves into believing we could have, nay, we DESERVED, cheap fuel forever. Europe has much higher fuel prices. We evolved our society in one direction ([sub]urban sprawl/commuting) and they in another (it helps that they are so small and dense though). Cost of travel is going to necessarily change lifestyle habits and the economy as a whole. A hidden cost to "cheap" gasoline is constant entanglement in a volatile middle-east region, a craven betrayal of our own principals to suck on the oil teat of foreign dictators, and a growing number of people who hate us. We've burnt a lot of money in peripheral costs involved in fossil fuels.
What are you talking about. From what I've heard we already MASSIVELY SUBSIDIZE our farmers to the extent that they are selling massive amounts of food on the world market at cost or below cost ("dumping"). Other nations get (rightly) pissed off at us about this.
So why not just redirect all that [corn|soy|whatevah] to a fuel source?
Yes. But the difference is now you can track who CLAIMED what was put in there. As long as the code is good and doesn't have any license patent issues, who cares if Linus knows. All we need is a way to backtrack and say: "Ok, you claim this code is bad? Well Bob over here signed it with this disclaimer so either you are wrong or Bob is wrong, but either way, Linux in general is not liable"
Seriously for people that can repartition their hard drive, configure X and recompile their kernel, simply turning off these eye-canding options seems bogglingly difficult. Geez. Just turn off the damn effects. It's the first thing I do. If you are in XP you can even revert to the Windows 2000 look and feel without all the eyecandy.
Unless this laptop was specially Linux "certified" I wouldn't even try it unless your main goal is to learn way more than you need about Linux. Save yourself the pain and just use the copy of Windows that came with it that you already paid for.
CLR is starting to become a prominent candidate for "open source development platform". Things like IronPython just make this sweeter. One-off interpreters are just a waste of time these days. You can get immense value by creating a generic-enough VM (like Parrot or CLR or JVM) and running <your-favorite-language> on it. Then you get all the benefits of consolidating effort on making the platform better. Next up should be PHP and Ruby (if they haven't already).
Re:Something good may yet come out of this
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
That is my point. While other nations have taxes that make them "feel" the price of oil, we don't (or at least don't have as much), so when prices spike, they really SPIKE. If we had been living for decades with $4/gallon gas, I think we would have already developed alternatives that would make such a spike not as painful.
Re:Running out of gas
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
What I find foolish is the notion that since we have a history of underestimating our ability to survive on fossil fuels, that we dispense with the question ALTOGETHER. "Hey Joe Bob predicted that we would run out of fuel in April 2004, and now it's May 2004! HAW HAW See what f00lish predictorizing gets you!" We know the supply is finite, and even if we DON'T know how long technology will let us mortgage the inevitable, there is a world of evils that are entails RIGHT NOW, not the least of which is dependence on an increasingly scarce fuel source in an increasing hostile part of the world. Would it really hurt us to have a plan, maybe just a little bit earlier than we actually need it? The earlier we convert, the longer we have to more efficiently use the supplies that ARE left.
But of course Smith's invisible hand will guarantee we make the best of the bad decisions left to us only when we absolutely have to instead of an optimal solution ahead of time.
I don't have a solution, just ranting.
Re:Something good may yet come out of this
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
"Americans would seem to have the least distorted notion of the price of energy."
You mean the perception that it is dirt cheap up until the exact moment at which it is used up?
Excellent. I happen to be a member of a board of a charitable foundation which invests in pyramid schemes. Please, sir, kindly send me a picture of your crew with miniature bridge sculptures balanced on their heads (this is important as it will show proof to the Troll Charitable Donation Foundation of your commitment), and I will wire the money as soon as possible!
Slashdot Mirror
"Yet Another vi-based Editor?"
"Sounds interesting, doesn't it?"
No.
The answer is to develop social feedback loops and an environment in which people generally /do not want to blow each other up/.
/without/ massive nano or biological weapon proliferation.
Of course that sort of long term solution requires much more persistence, humility, dedication and sacrifice than packing lots of explosives into a bomb and just dropping it on people you don't like.
I think we are starting to see this, even
If you have enough "AK-47 proliferation" it doesn't matter how many bombs you drop.
Yes, CLR was intended (at least by Microsoft's design) to pre-compile (would that be Just Before Time compiler?) before running. In reality both are possible, and Mono does also have a pure interpreter. Some optimizations are actually better made on a running process that can be dynamically profiled ("hotspot"). One gripe I do have about Java is that it does not appear to at least cache these learned optimizations, so every time you start a Java app, it basically has to relearn the optimizations (not an issue on server apps, mostly for desktop apps). I don't know what Mono's implementation does as far as optimization.
Note that GCJ is another alternative that natively compiles bytecode.
"The problem inherent with one-time passwords and TAN schemes is that people print them out and stick them on their monitor with a post-it."
What is the utility of doing that since they are ONE TIME. Why would you ever want to post it up after it was used once? Presumably they are "scratch off" so merely putting the booklet up won't make it obvious what the passwords actually are. And then they STILL need your real password first.
It won't happen. There are already Java language forks that offer enhancements, but the vast vast majority of Java developers use "standard" Java, not one of these screwbal forks. In fact, being open source might make it LESS prone to forking because people can now integrate into a common base instead of forking.
"A further step toward that, of course, is the company dormitories that semi-forced-laborers live in in the third world, of course."
;)
either that or the cube-dorms of IT startups
By the way company dormitories are not an entirely foreign concept. Hell, whole towns were built to support companies.
That is a good idea and living in a university town a lot of people do that. But the land value anywhere within practical cycling range of almost any city is very high, so you will be lucky if you can afford your house.
Wow. Some responses to all of your responses:
I'm surprised at the number of 12.5 gallons a year per acre. That indeed seems meagre.
I'm not suggesting that we don't also need to fundamentally change the weight of our cars and how we travel. That's a lifestyle change that's harder to sell.
As far as $4.00/gal fuel. It's our own damn fault if we have fooled ourselves into believing we could have, nay, we DESERVED, cheap fuel forever. Europe has much higher fuel prices. We evolved our society in one direction ([sub]urban sprawl/commuting) and they in another (it helps that they are so small and dense though). Cost of travel is going to necessarily change lifestyle habits and the economy as a whole. A hidden cost to "cheap" gasoline is constant entanglement in a volatile middle-east region, a craven betrayal of our own principals to suck on the oil teat of foreign dictators, and a growing number of people who hate us. We've burnt a lot of money in peripheral costs involved in fossil fuels.
What are you talking about. From what I've heard we already MASSIVELY SUBSIDIZE our farmers to the extent that they are selling massive amounts of food on the world market at cost or below cost ("dumping"). Other nations get (rightly) pissed off at us about this.
So why not just redirect all that [corn|soy|whatevah] to a fuel source?
Except that biodeisel is renewable and probably doesn't carry as many nasty political ramifications as fossil fuel.
"Computer Science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes"
E W Dijkstra.
I guess that's why they don't call it "Telescope Science", eh?
"admitting that Linus has no idea"
Yes. But the difference is now you can track who CLAIMED what was put in there. As long as the code is good and doesn't have any license patent issues, who cares if Linus knows. All we need is a way to backtrack and say: "Ok, you claim this code is bad? Well Bob over here signed it with this disclaimer so either you are wrong or Bob is wrong, but either way, Linux in general is not liable"
Did you RTFA? In the slides they specifically mention that they "eyecandy" version (Aero Glass) will most probably be turned OFF for enterprise users.
Seriously for people that can repartition their hard drive, configure X and recompile their kernel, simply turning off these eye-canding options seems bogglingly difficult. Geez. Just turn off the damn effects. It's the first thing I do. If you are in XP you can even revert to the Windows 2000 look and feel without all the eyecandy.
Those studies are flawed
h tm l
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/msciprayer.
"without major headaches in setting it all up"
Unless this laptop was specially Linux "certified" I wouldn't even try it unless your main goal is to learn way more than you need about Linux. Save yourself the pain and just use the copy of Windows that came with it that you already paid for.
"it pays off"
For the guy they hire for your position after you burn out and quit? tee hee
Hehe, I was just wondering about that. From the titles, it didn't seem the parties were all that "opposite".
CLR is starting to become a prominent candidate for "open source development platform". Things like IronPython just make this sweeter. One-off interpreters are just a waste of time these days. You can get immense value by creating a generic-enough VM (like Parrot or CLR or JVM) and running <your-favorite-language> on it. Then you get all the benefits of consolidating effort on making the platform better. Next up should be PHP and Ruby (if they haven't already).
That is my point. While other nations have taxes that make them "feel" the price of oil, we don't (or at least don't have as much), so when prices spike, they really SPIKE. If we had been living for decades with $4/gallon gas, I think we would have already developed alternatives that would make such a spike not as painful.
What I find foolish is the notion that since we have a history of underestimating our ability to survive on fossil fuels, that we dispense with the question ALTOGETHER. "Hey Joe Bob predicted that we would run out of fuel in April 2004, and now it's May 2004! HAW HAW See what f00lish predictorizing gets you!" We know the supply is finite, and even if we DON'T know how long technology will let us mortgage the inevitable, there is a world of evils that are entails RIGHT NOW, not the least of which is dependence on an increasingly scarce fuel source in an increasing hostile part of the world. Would it really hurt us to have a plan, maybe just a little bit earlier than we actually need it? The earlier we convert, the longer we have to more efficiently use the supplies that ARE left.
But of course Smith's invisible hand will guarantee we make the best of the bad decisions left to us only when we absolutely have to instead of an optimal solution ahead of time.
I don't have a solution, just ranting.
"Americans would seem to have the least distorted notion of the price of energy."
You mean the perception that it is dirt cheap up until the exact moment at which it is used up?
Uh, maybe this is why they put STICKERS on the fuel pumps that say to TURN OFF YOUR CELL PHONE. Duh. Next time try reading the signs.
Oh man...re: your sig...
I picture a little dial a-la Spinal Tap -
"How fucked are we? Well, let's check the Fucked-O-Meter: it's up to 11!"
Excellent. I happen to be a member of a board of a charitable foundation which invests in pyramid schemes. Please, sir, kindly send me a picture of your crew with miniature bridge sculptures balanced on their heads (this is important as it will show proof to the Troll Charitable Donation Foundation of your commitment), and I will wire the money as soon as possible!