in C, I have to do so much stuff by hand: conversions, array insertions and such, but in Perl, everything does what it should
I am all for scripting languages such as perl and my favorite python, but this isn't the way I would describe it.
In C, some stuff needs to be done by hand, but it does what you want it to do.
In many scripting languages, it does what the interpreter thinks it should do and getting things to act the way you want is much harder if this differs from what the interpreter thinks it should do.
Both approaches have their uses. Some things are just easier in Perl/Python/whatever. Some are easier in C.
Frankly, 20 MB is not going to give you performance issues. To realistically test the performance of your engine and your queries/schemas, you need at least enough data to fill main memory and cause disks to be used. Much more would be much better.
I get 30 highway (sometimes more, I tend to speed a little). And 24 city.
My numbers were about the same as the 21/26 above when I was driving around with no bumper( waiting on the body shop).
I was going to mention that a manual transmission can give you much better mileage than an automatic, but looking at the epa page, they used a manual for the testing. Shoots that theory in the foot.
For the lucky among us with a hard science education, 2.540000cm really means 2.540000 +/-.0000005 cm. In other words trailing zeroes are an indication of an inexact measurement and the number of digits tells how exact.
2.54 cm exactly means that you can add as many zeros as you like and it will be a true conversion.
It is scary that you would think these laws should be enforced as described.
Selective enforcement is a travesty and leads to giving way too much power to prosecutors and police to simply enforce the law against those they have a personal vendetta against.
Sodomy laws, if selectively enforced, would be applicable to nearly EVERYONE, so the police and prosecutors would choose who they don't like. Have you ever given/gotten a blow job, anal sex, doggy style, etc. Most people have.
Do you seriously think a separatoin of State and Business is possible?
The most obvious reason is that government must buy things. Stapler, paper, desks, golden toilet seats, etc. Unless of course they make everything they need, but that quickly turns into socialism. (To make Staplers we need steel, to make steel we need coal and iron and power, to get these we need...).
I know (or at least hope) that was a joke, but the only reason any states still have sodomy laws (not including bestiality) is that they haven't been enforced in years.
If anyone tried to enforce these laws, they would be nullified by the courts as unconstitutional. I live in a college town (meaning sorority houses with up to ~20 residents) where any residence where more than 5 women live is legally considered a brothel. Antiquated laws stay on the books long after they have reached the end of their useful lives.
DISCLAIMER: I am by no means promoting censorship in any fashion.
Your analogy isn't acurate, however. A telephone conversation can reasonably be assumed to be a point to point communication. The Internet and especially www pages are more akin to broadcast media, which is regulated for content in every country I know of.
It was the first programming language for a personal computer.
Well, maybe the first high-level programming language or the first language interpretter, but I'm willing to bet that the machine didn't run basic natively, so the native language must have been earlier.
There are several problems to be solved and several questions that need to be answered first.
1. Are you looking for an OTS solution or are you willing to roll your own?
2. What scale is involved and what is the speed of the network?
The problems:
1. The packets to each end user will be exactly the same. Hence, a shared key algorithm is required for encrypting the mpeg stream.
2. There must be some way to boot (as in kick) users. Since we know a shared key stream will be required, the only way to boot users is to change the key.
3. Each user needs to authenticate individually.
I know nothing about the OTS products available, but if you are going to roll your own, here is a suggested framework.
Choose a stream encryption algorithm. Format your stream with a marker on each frame telling which key was used to encrypt that packet. This only means an extra bit or two depending on how often you rotate the key. One bit would be sufficient on many implementations.
For authentication, each client log into the server over ssh(or whatever secure method you choose) using whatever authentication method you choose(2 factor kerberos comes to mind if you want ultra security). Use this as a side channel to distribute keys. Each key will be distributed with an index. Once a new key has been pushed to all clients, the mpeg stream can be switched to the new key. If a client is to be removed, simply don't send them any new keys.
The problems with this is the scalability of the ssh connections. You could set up a seperate server for these and the video stream if load is a problem. Even with many connections, I doubt these connections would get in the way of bandwidth.
(Sometimes I really wish Quebec would go back to it's "release in both official languages at the same time, by law.)
How does this help anyone? All this would accomplish is making the English speakers wait longer for their release.
Also if the law matches your description, it would also prevent companies who lack the resources to create a French version from releasing anything at all. That seems to be a very anti-competitive/big business stance.
I didn't say that they shouldn't do this. Or that they don't have the right to (unless the government steps in and says otherwise). I just said that this is what their monopoly powers allow. In a competitive market no one player would be capable of making these demands without seriously harming themselves through loss of sales, unless single-supplier agreements were common in the market in which case everyone would have these agreements and difference manufacturers would include whatever os they had an agreement with.
If RH wanted to do the same thing, they would have to cut a deal, but in today's market, they don't have the power to make demands like MS does.
Because they know that major OEM's are smart enough to distribute the os that will sell the most computers. This is one of the reasons why monopolies are bad for open markets: they have the power to limit competition by making rules such as the one mentioned.
But if you let them in you can also make the rules about what they can do.
State up front that only one officer is allowed in; that everything he moves he must return to its original position; and that he must leave the instant you ask him to.
If they get a warrant, they can bring many officers and toss everything within the scope of that warrant.
If they come to you first, it saves them having to go to a judge, and they will probably be much more likely to treat you with courtesy.
Back to the original post, it sounds like the police thought this was a goose chase anyway. If they really thought the friend was a terrorist, they would have handed it off to the FBI immediately and not given him a heads-up before showing up with a warrant.
Whilst the claim the open source software will devastate the economy is probably overblown, Mr. Sharp does have a point. Goverments _should_ purchase goods from their home country whenever possible, or from companies that hire the citizens of said country.
Let's face it, open source software doesn't seem to employ very many people. It's not good business for Governments to push products that are detrimental to the welfare of its citizens.
If you look at this from a smaller government is better point of view, if governments spend less money buying software, they can lower taxes or put the money to better use elsewhere.
They may also instead spend the money on developing on top of/improving/customizing the open source software, which will not only employ programmers (all of whom are their citizens), but will give said government better software. If they buy proprietary software, they give money to a company to do the same things except they do not know where the money is spent. Much of it may go overseas even if they purchase from a domestic corporation.
If you take a good look at the real economics of the system, governments should spend as little as possible. Sometimes it is even worth buying from overseas. Less spending means fewer taxes and any economist will tell you that lower taxes are better for an economy when taken as a whole. If taxes are lower, the citizens will have more money to spend. Goods will be cheaper and therefore more marketable overseas.
Admittedly, this is a simplification, but I think it hits pretty close to the truth. There are also many other factors that need to be taken into account. Governments do more than just watch over the economy.
The most obvious reason for subversion repos is that subversion uses a small number of berkeley db files for the entire repository, so filesystem level controls may apply to the entire repository, but not individual files.
With cvs, this is possible if the filesystem uses acl's. If not, there are only the standard user, group and other categories, so there are only 3 possible access levels. Additionally, when a new file is created, the admin will have to set the permissions on these.
I believe it would be nice to build this into the control system so that a user could specify the privileges for each added file, but that would probably require the system itself to be suid to either root or some repository-specific user, which would make exploits possibly more dangerous.
They focus on a small set of goals-- make it easy to search through a ton of information.
Originally this was the case, but recently even Google has started forays into other services. Just click the "more>>" link above the search field on their front page.
Froogle(shopping), groups(news groups), blogger, and of course there is the even popular/. subject, gmail.
Slashdot Mirror
That's what you get for running a dead os.
in C, I have to do so much stuff by hand: conversions, array insertions and such, but in Perl, everything does what it should
I am all for scripting languages such as perl and my favorite python, but this isn't the way I would describe it.
In C, some stuff needs to be done by hand, but it does what you want it to do.
In many scripting languages, it does what the interpreter thinks it should do and getting things to act the way you want is much harder if this differs from what the interpreter thinks it should do.
Both approaches have their uses. Some things are just easier in Perl/Python/whatever. Some are easier in C.
Sports stats are always good.
Frankly, 20 MB is not going to give you performance issues. To realistically test the performance of your engine and your queries/schemas, you need at least enough data to fill main memory and cause disks to be used. Much more would be much better.
V6, ~250hp, 5 speed, regular unleaded.
THe epa numbers are 21/26 mpg.
I get 30 highway (sometimes more, I tend to speed a little). And 24 city.
My numbers were about the same as the 21/26 above when I was driving around with no bumper( waiting on the body shop).
I was going to mention that a manual transmission can give you much better mileage than an automatic, but looking at the epa page, they used a manual for the testing. Shoots that theory in the foot.
For the lucky among us with a hard science education, 2.540000cm really means 2.540000 +/- .0000005 cm. In other words trailing zeroes are an indication of an inexact measurement and the number of digits tells how exact.
2.54 cm exactly means that you can add as many zeros as you like and it will be a true conversion.
It is scary that you would think these laws should be enforced as described.
Selective enforcement is a travesty and leads to giving way too much power to prosecutors and police to simply enforce the law against those they have a personal vendetta against.
Sodomy laws, if selectively enforced, would be applicable to nearly EVERYONE, so the police and prosecutors would choose who they don't like. Have you ever given/gotten a blow job, anal sex, doggy style, etc. Most people have.
Do you seriously think a separatoin of State and Business is possible?
The most obvious reason is that government must buy things. Stapler, paper, desks, golden toilet seats, etc. Unless of course they make everything they need, but that quickly turns into socialism. (To make Staplers we need steel, to make steel we need coal and iron and power, to get these we need...).
OK, then how about premeditated versus non-premeditated murder versus murder in self defense.
Same intent (to kill), different crimes (or lack thereof).
I know (or at least hope) that was a joke, but the only reason any states still have sodomy laws (not including bestiality) is that they haven't been enforced in years.
If anyone tried to enforce these laws, they would be nullified by the courts as unconstitutional. I live in a college town (meaning sorority houses with up to ~20 residents) where any residence where more than 5 women live is legally considered a brothel. Antiquated laws stay on the books long after they have reached the end of their useful lives.
DISCLAIMER: I am by no means promoting censorship in any fashion.
Your analogy isn't acurate, however. A telephone conversation can reasonably be assumed to be a point to point communication. The Internet and especially www pages are more akin to broadcast media, which is regulated for content in every country I know of.
It was the first programming language for a personal computer.
Well, maybe the first high-level programming language or the first language interpretter, but I'm willing to bet that the machine didn't run basic natively, so the native language must have been earlier.
There are several problems to be solved and several questions that need to be answered first.
1. Are you looking for an OTS solution or are you willing to roll your own?
2. What scale is involved and what is the speed of the network?
The problems:
1. The packets to each end user will be exactly the same. Hence, a shared key algorithm is required for encrypting the mpeg stream.
2. There must be some way to boot (as in kick) users. Since we know a shared key stream will be required, the only way to boot users is to change the key.
3. Each user needs to authenticate individually.
I know nothing about the OTS products available, but if you are going to roll your own, here is a suggested framework.
Choose a stream encryption algorithm. Format your stream with a marker on each frame telling which key was used to encrypt that packet. This only means an extra bit or two depending on how often you rotate the key. One bit would be sufficient on many implementations.
For authentication, each client log into the server over ssh(or whatever secure method you choose) using whatever authentication method you choose(2 factor kerberos comes to mind if you want ultra security). Use this as a side channel to distribute keys. Each key will be distributed with an index. Once a new key has been pushed to all clients, the mpeg stream can be switched to the new key. If a client is to be removed, simply don't send them any new keys.
The problems with this is the scalability of the ssh connections. You could set up a seperate server for these and the video stream if load is a problem. Even with many connections, I doubt these connections would get in the way of bandwidth.
(Sometimes I really wish Quebec would go back to it's "release in both official languages at the same time, by law.)
How does this help anyone? All this would accomplish is making the English speakers wait longer for their release.
Also if the law matches your description, it would also prevent companies who lack the resources to create a French version from releasing anything at all. That seems to be a very anti-competitive/big business stance.
If it is restricted to the 802.11 frequencies, no.
I didn't say that they shouldn't do this. Or that they don't have the right to (unless the government steps in and says otherwise). I just said that this is what their monopoly powers allow. In a competitive market no one player would be capable of making these demands without seriously harming themselves through loss of sales, unless single-supplier agreements were common in the market in which case everyone would have these agreements and difference manufacturers would include whatever os they had an agreement with.
If RH wanted to do the same thing, they would have to cut a deal, but in today's market, they don't have the power to make demands like MS does.
the ridiculous "SiteFinder" service.
:-P to make it abundantly clear that calling SiteFinder a service is an insult to the word service.
I think the quotation marks would have been better placed like so:
the ridiculous SiteFinder "service".
And maybe even a
Because they know that major OEM's are smart enough to distribute the os that will sell the most computers. This is one of the reasons why monopolies are bad for open markets: they have the power to limit competition by making rules such as the one mentioned.
It is not specified what type of sort is used for the c++ algorithm.
I didn't bother making the point because it isn't specified in the Python language what algorithm is used either.
sorry first line should be
#include <algorithm>
#include
void quicksort(int *a, int len){
std::sort(a,a+len);
}
But if you let them in you can also make the rules about what they can do.
State up front that only one officer is allowed in; that everything he moves he must return to its original position; and that he must leave the instant you ask him to.
If they get a warrant, they can bring many officers and toss everything within the scope of that warrant.
If they come to you first, it saves them having to go to a judge, and they will probably be much more likely to treat you with courtesy.
Back to the original post, it sounds like the police thought this was a goose chase anyway. If they really thought the friend was a terrorist, they would have handed it off to the FBI immediately and not given him a heads-up before showing up with a warrant.
Whilst the claim the open source software will devastate the economy is probably overblown, Mr. Sharp does have a point. Goverments _should_ purchase goods from their home country whenever possible, or from companies that hire the citizens of said country.
Let's face it, open source software doesn't seem to employ very many people. It's not good business for Governments to push products that are detrimental to the welfare of its citizens.
If you look at this from a smaller government is better point of view, if governments spend less money buying software, they can lower taxes or put the money to better use elsewhere.
They may also instead spend the money on developing on top of/improving/customizing the open source software, which will not only employ programmers (all of whom are their citizens), but will give said government better software. If they buy proprietary software, they give money to a company to do the same things except they do not know where the money is spent. Much of it may go overseas even if they purchase from a domestic corporation.
If you take a good look at the real economics of the system, governments should spend as little as possible. Sometimes it is even worth buying from overseas. Less spending means fewer taxes and any economist will tell you that lower taxes are better for an economy when taken as a whole. If taxes are lower, the citizens will have more money to spend. Goods will be cheaper and therefore more marketable overseas.
Admittedly, this is a simplification, but I think it hits pretty close to the truth. There are also many other factors that need to be taken into account. Governments do more than just watch over the economy.
The most obvious reason for subversion repos is that subversion uses a small number of berkeley db files for the entire repository, so filesystem level controls may apply to the entire repository, but not individual files.
With cvs, this is possible if the filesystem uses acl's. If not, there are only the standard user, group and other categories, so there are only 3 possible access levels. Additionally, when a new file is created, the admin will have to set the permissions on these.
I believe it would be nice to build this into the control system so that a user could specify the privileges for each added file, but that would probably require the system itself to be suid to either root or some repository-specific user, which would make exploits possibly more dangerous.
I'm not familiar with the CPL, but I would be suprised if it allowed for this.
Anyone know?
They focus on a small set of goals-- make it easy to search through a ton of information.
/. subject, gmail.
Originally this was the case, but recently even Google has started forays into other services. Just click the "more>>" link above the search field on their front page.
Froogle(shopping), groups(news groups), blogger, and of course there is the even popular
Unfortunately it seems they may be losing focus.