BigTable is 15 year old technology that has been completely surpassed by modern relational systems. Many Googlers complain about it and would rather not use it.
The object/relational impedance mismatch is often cited by people who think they should not have to model information to persist information (they mistake their object model for an information model). While it's almost always worth your while to design an information model behind your objects, in the case that it's not you don't have to. Either way a modern relational system has you covered.
If you're persisting the objects from your oo app then you're already doing it wrong. ORM libraries, etc. are just further down the hole. If you can't be bothered to think about what information describes your objects then you don't have persistence, you have persistent cache which is all hibernate is supposed to be. If your app is boxed software or a game or something then that's probably good enough. But if your app is online and expected to scale and evolve over time then choosing to persist objects rather than information is shooting yourself in the foot.
I'm curious, what happens to all the objects in your object store when the application changes?
I'm sorry but the use of auto-incrementing columns as primary keys is considered very good practice these days for anything beyond first normal form. Of course they can be abused/misused and wreak all sorts of havoc but that's no reason to make blanket statements. It reminds me of the greybeards that vehemently reject NULL/3VL as anything but nonsense and refuse to use nullable columns even when the situation calls for it.
with these social products it's more like a war over land than doing business. think of social community as a place that's currently occupied by facebook. the fixed quantity resource are all the eyeballs using the product and the data they generate.
yep these things are going to depreciate worse than a new computer. they really ought to be baking in some sort of upgrade or core exchange process so the early adopters aren't all taking a bath.
an uninflateable currency is still very valuable. it might not be the super-liquid lubrication that makes the world go round but it could be a safe place to put your money. I could see a future dominated by two currencies - one that's uninflateable with a tendency to increase in value over time and another that hyperinflates and really should be spent fast. perhaps these two currencies are BTC and USD
.NET consists of a stack-based intermediate language designed for jitting rather than interpreting by a CLR that supports a bunch of very nice high level languages and platforms. Its design was lead by Anders Hejlsberg who many consider to be the Sir Isaac Newton of programming..NET is beautiful and something MS actually got right.
I don't buy it. Trillions of operations later we know the Sixty-trillionth binary digit of pi squared is 1 and the hardware is flawless or 50/50 chance it got lucky
what you're describing is basically netbooks/slates. bobcat and atom are just slow enough to be annoying. sure you can run windows on it, but it runs like shit and you get about 5 hours battery time. meanwhile arm chips are providing a snappy experience on a fraction of the power.
seriously. you'd think a form factor change as dramatic as tablets and phones would be an opportunity to lose the x86 legacy cruft and innovate. netbooks were a lame fad. the only good thing coming from super low tdp x86 is multicore desktop chips. by passing on ARM AMD are basically stating they want nothing to do with the tablet and smartphone market
still wrong. people are constantly trying to rally anon for one thing or another. so far it's pretty random what will gain momentum and what won't - maybe slightly better odds if it involves destroying somebody who is abusing cats.
I wonder if the Chrysler tanks will be due similar scrutiny...
doubt it. scba tanks are strapped to our backs and providing us life-air while deep under water. a tank failure would probably kill a diver so this extreme cautionary preventative maintenance is warranted.
before you start checking every car on the lot you might want to see if the 24 conditions can even be met. that's the boolean satisfiability problem and it's proven np-complete. the problem isn't finding the car, it's determining if you should bother to look.
3SAT is a special case of a special case of that problem so the car analogy would be way contrived and less interesting. 3SAT was thought to be proven np-complete though so this result is interesting at least in that it disproves that.
er said that backwards, it's rational 0.333... and real 0.333
also, the number types tend to have infinities between them making the more complex ones infinitely more useful. for instance there are an infinite number of real numbers in the form of 0.33..3 that are not equal to 0.333...
I see people having trouble with this concept time and again and the truth is that it just seems so silly once you understand the different number types. Basically you're confusing the real 0.333... with the rational 0.333. Read more here.
Slashdot Mirror
BigTable is 15 year old technology that has been completely surpassed by modern relational systems. Many Googlers complain about it and would rather not use it.
The object/relational impedance mismatch is often cited by people who think they should not have to model information to persist information (they mistake their object model for an information model). While it's almost always worth your while to design an information model behind your objects, in the case that it's not you don't have to. Either way a modern relational system has you covered.
If you're persisting the objects from your oo app then you're already doing it wrong. ORM libraries, etc. are just further down the hole. If you can't be bothered to think about what information describes your objects then you don't have persistence, you have persistent cache which is all hibernate is supposed to be. If your app is boxed software or a game or something then that's probably good enough. But if your app is online and expected to scale and evolve over time then choosing to persist objects rather than information is shooting yourself in the foot.
I'm curious, what happens to all the objects in your object store when the application changes?
I'm sorry but the use of auto-incrementing columns as primary keys is considered very good practice these days for anything beyond first normal form. Of course they can be abused/misused and wreak all sorts of havoc but that's no reason to make blanket statements. It reminds me of the greybeards that vehemently reject NULL/3VL as anything but nonsense and refuse to use nullable columns even when the situation calls for it.
The value is in the higher quality driver software
with these social products it's more like a war over land than doing business. think of social community as a place that's currently occupied by facebook. the fixed quantity resource are all the eyeballs using the product and the data they generate.
yep these things are going to depreciate worse than a new computer. they really ought to be baking in some sort of upgrade or core exchange process so the early adopters aren't all taking a bath.
so tag your mp3's with random guids. Now their md5's are unique and won't show up in any blacklist
there was suspicion that they'd been compromised 7 days ago when over 500k was moved in one transaction http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=15998.0
It's no different than prospectors who pulled gold right out of the ground before and during the gold rush.
an uninflateable currency is still very valuable. it might not be the super-liquid lubrication that makes the world go round but it could be a safe place to put your money. I could see a future dominated by two currencies - one that's uninflateable with a tendency to increase in value over time and another that hyperinflates and really should be spent fast. perhaps these two currencies are BTC and USD
.NET consists of a stack-based intermediate language designed for jitting rather than interpreting by a CLR that supports a bunch of very nice high level languages and platforms. Its design was lead by Anders Hejlsberg who many consider to be the Sir Isaac Newton of programming. .NET is beautiful and something MS actually got right.
I don't buy it. Trillions of operations later we know the Sixty-trillionth binary digit of pi squared is 1 and the hardware is flawless or 50/50 chance it got lucky
what you're describing is basically netbooks/slates. bobcat and atom are just slow enough to be annoying. sure you can run windows on it, but it runs like shit and you get about 5 hours battery time. meanwhile arm chips are providing a snappy experience on a fraction of the power.
seriously. you'd think a form factor change as dramatic as tablets and phones would be an opportunity to lose the x86 legacy cruft and innovate. netbooks were a lame fad. the only good thing coming from super low tdp x86 is multicore desktop chips. by passing on ARM AMD are basically stating they want nothing to do with the tablet and smartphone market
that article is amazing. that guy needs to go on a vigilante shooting spree just to make things right!
it's called social media monitoring and engagement and get used to it because it's the future of marketing. more
Who works on Artificial Brain then? Don't say AI researchers.
cognition researchers
still wrong. people are constantly trying to rally anon for one thing or another. so far it's pretty random what will gain momentum and what won't - maybe slightly better odds if it involves destroying somebody who is abusing cats.
time travel
I wonder if the Chrysler tanks will be due similar scrutiny...
doubt it. scba tanks are strapped to our backs and providing us life-air while deep under water. a tank failure would probably kill a diver so this extreme cautionary preventative maintenance is warranted.
before you start checking every car on the lot you might want to see if the 24 conditions can even be met. that's the boolean satisfiability problem and it's proven np-complete. the problem isn't finding the car, it's determining if you should bother to look.
3SAT is a special case of a special case of that problem so the car analogy would be way contrived and less interesting. 3SAT was thought to be proven np-complete though so this result is interesting at least in that it disproves that.
er said that backwards, it's rational 0.333... and real 0.333
also, the number types tend to have infinities between them making the more complex ones infinitely more useful. for instance there are an infinite number of real numbers in the form of 0.33..3 that are not equal to 0.333...
I see people having trouble with this concept time and again and the truth is that it just seems so silly once you understand the different number types. Basically you're confusing the real 0.333... with the rational 0.333. Read more here.
I'm sure this was accomplished by smelling where the ball would be
I don't think he can see out. That should make his "performance" even more impressive since he basically did it all blindfolded.