Does it make a difference in my behavior? Verily it does, but not in the way you would expect.
The idea behind regulations that increase the ease with which you can see what your kids are doing, is to prevent them from doing something stupid behind your back. But that doesn't work, and here's why: People hate being distrusted. They hate the feeling that somebody thinks they must be watched. They'll rebel against it. For one thing, they probably think that they're smarter than you think they are. Whether they are or not depends of course on the individual person in question.
In any case, creating regulations of transparency is bound to make people secretive and do things they probably wouldn't do if they were allowed to.
Here's a better way to achieve the openness and safety that you want: teach your kids how to be smart. Start as early as you can. Start today. What you *don't* want to do, parents of teenagers, is suddenly start a throat-shoving campaine of whatever new thing you've decided to teach them. But try to give them an idea of what is safe and what isn't.
You can trust your kids. They know, and you can help them to know, where sleeze is. Sleeze is easy to identify; Drive your six year old through the local porno district. You child doesn't need to be told it's a bad place to be.
What you do with transparency regulations is declare that your household is not going to be an open place where everybody can trust one another.
A better solution to your problem is to encourage your kids to tell you what's going on, to be open, to be your friend, rather than treating them like monkeys that have to be watched. Now, the best way to encourage somebody isn't the way that I had experience with with my parents, that is, yelling and ranting about it. The best way is to treat your kids like you want to be treated. Be their friends. Be open with them. Give them the benefit of the doubt. In doing this, you'll truly create a mutually open relationship with them.
I know you're very worried about the harm that could come to your kids, with a silent telephone to nign anyone. But please remember, these sorts of things are blown WAY out of proportion by the media. When I read stories about kids getting into deep shit on the net, one thing always seems to be evident: *They were asking for it*. Teach you kids not to ask for it. You'll have far better luck than just preventing them from asking.
Parallax has a wonderful line of cheap, easy to program, microcontrollers called stamps. The low-end one is about $25 if I recall, and it's about everything you need.
Emacs is small, fast, extensable, easy to use, efficient, and runs on both Linux and Windows.
It is basicaly everything you said you want. It beats the socks off Visual Studio, or can be made to emulate it. Your pick. Once you learn emacs, you will constantly become more productive as you tweak it and learn new little corners you never knew about before. The motto of every emacs user: "I have used emacs for many years, but have not yet reached its full potential".:-)
On the other hand, emacs is very simple for the new user. You don't have to know anything fancy at first. Just learn a few simple commands from the built-in tutorial, and you'll be on your way. Pick up new tricks as you go along.
Swing is a GUI toolkit that is part of J2SE. This is what most people are talking about when they say 'client-side Java'. But Java is a fine language apart from the whole Grand Unified Platform bit. A Java program talking to QT, wxWindows, Cocoa or something like that, has no major impedements, and performence is not an issue.
Swing, on the other hand, is brain-dead, ugly, and slower than cold tar. Never, ever use Swing. You're giving Java a bad name. Swing is obnoxtous for programmers, and frustrates users by being unresponsive (prime example: ArgoUML, which is so slow it's literally unusable on my i686). JEdit is also too slow. Furthermore, Swing programs don't fit correctly in desktops, especially Mac OS X.
Use QT or wxWindows with Java or Python, and you'll be fine.
Exactly. For while stripping a document of well-known markup is trivial, adding markup to a loosely-formed collection of formatting kludges designed only so that humans can see them is hard.
And it would be okay if they just made this mistake in the past and their new books are marked up. But they seem to have (and maybe this isn't their intention; it's just how they sound to me) this attitude, almost elitist, that markup is a Bad Thing and that ASCII is the One True Format and they aren't even going to think about switching to anything else, ever.
About 2 months ago a bought the most expensive mouse I have ever owned. FredMayer's had it on sale for $10. The Microsoft Wheel Mouse Optical USB, in addition to the red light underneeth, has a *extra* red light in the back (or whatever is called the side facing you), just so everybody knows that it is optical.
And while the real light dims when not used (which is very cool, BTW), the decoration light doesn't, so it is on, bugging me, and consuming power, 24x7.
Programming languages may come and go, but good old fashion machine code will last as long as literature, very much like good old fasion ASCII text and good old fashion zip files with no meaningfull names.
I used Mac OS almost exclucivly, from 7.0 to 10.1, and still use it now-and-then. The 7.0 Mac was a Mac TV. My current Apple box is a first edition iMac DV; That's 400 Mhz G3 CPU, 100 MHz system bus, 196 MB RAM, 10 GB 5400 RPM hard disk ATI Rage128 AGP graphics, etc.
Mac OS 10.0 was rather unresponsive in the GUI. I think that most `MacOS is slow' compliants arise therefrom.
10.1 is vastly better. Moving windows around is indistiguishable from realtime (unless you have about 6 or more transparent window stacked atop each other, but when does that happen?). Resizing windows is better than Xfree 4.2.1 on my 686 SiS box.
Overall, the GUI has a feel of great boroqity, but also is very `polished' (exactly the opposite of X, which is crude and almost flemsy in feel). It sort of reminds me of Java. No, not Java programs or coding in Java or whatever, and Java isn't slow. I just always have this weird picture in my head of Java being like some kind of big huge thing that works perfectly and C being this small tiny thing that is far less elegent. I'm weird, though. It feels, `together', you know? Even though resizing that iTunes window is around 4 frames per second, the way it doesn't flicker at all and the edges blend in with the background and stuff is SO vastly better than my KDE desktop, where you resize something and the decorations move quickly, but everything flickers around and the windows go blank for a moment and stuff.
Anyhoo, for actual computation and stuff it seems fast enough, but all that I do on my Linux box now.
The only reason I still have a Mac is for OmniGraffle, BTW.
The deal is: your saying that people should be sold a line at, say, 768kbps, on the assuption that they won't use it. But then, when they actually DO use the bandwidth that *they pay for*, you say "Oops, your using all the bandwidth we sold you, we'll have to charge you more for it", which isn't right. If I pay $70/month for a 786kbps line, then I should be able to use exactly up to but not exceeding 786kbps, on that line, for $70/month. Period. If I use less, maybe I should pay less. But otherwise it is falsity in advertising, to say I get some bandwidth for some price and then charge me more if I use the full bandwidth quoted to me. If they only want you to use a fraction of that, then that fraction is what should be quoted for the price. Kushish?
Java is similar to C++ like (um...something simple but slick) is similar to (some montrosity). So I'm not good at thinking of analogies. Sue me.:-)
Anyway, I also like Ruby. And in fact was pondering which I should chant at the end of that post. I describe Ruby often as, "What [Perl,Python,Smalltalk] should have been". It bogols me why Python is so much more populer than Ruby, when the later is so very better.
Re:Apple's MPW C compiler famous for its error msg
on
Gnarly Error Messages
·
· Score: 1
Exactly. Claris is an artifact from the old days when Apple was less 'professional' and would do that kind of thing. It might still happen internally, but that would never get through the Jobs professionalism test that makes Mac OS X so boring.
My preview channel runs PowerPoint. Once some error happened (I don't remember the messaage), with the dialog being broadcasted for at least an hour. Then, they broadcasted the Pipes screensaver for the rest of the day.
I've been using Ion off-and-on recently, trying to decide if I want to switch. It is very great. I didn't like posion, because (a) it brakes my web browser, Konquerer, and (b) I find it akward to use.
Ion is similar. You can have multipal frames on the screen at a time (which is good), but the frames never overlap. One thing to note is that multipal clients can be in the same frame (one shows up at a time). Each frame (or the whole screen if you only have one) has a row of tabs at the top, one for each client. It's great.
Recently I had the chance to read about the first 30 pages of a 'redbook' manual for the top-of-the-line pServer, which has several POWER4 CPUs. It was interesting.
Slashdot Mirror
Does it make a difference in my behavior? Verily it does, but not in the way you would expect.
The idea behind regulations that increase the ease with which you can see what your kids are doing, is to prevent them from doing something stupid behind your back. But that doesn't work, and here's why: People hate being distrusted. They hate the feeling that somebody thinks they must be watched. They'll rebel against it. For one thing, they probably think that they're smarter than you think they are. Whether they are or not depends of course on the individual person in question.
In any case, creating regulations of transparency is bound to make people secretive and do things they probably wouldn't do if they were allowed to.
Here's a better way to achieve the openness and safety that you want: teach your kids how to be smart. Start as early as you can. Start today. What you *don't* want to do, parents of teenagers, is suddenly start a throat-shoving campaine of whatever new thing you've decided to teach them. But try to give them an idea of what is safe and what isn't.
You can trust your kids. They know, and you can help them to know, where sleeze is. Sleeze is easy to identify; Drive your six year old through the local porno district. You child doesn't need to be told it's a bad place to be.
What you do with transparency regulations is declare that your household is not going to be an open place where everybody can trust one another.
A better solution to your problem is to encourage your kids to tell you what's going on, to be open, to be your friend, rather than treating them like monkeys that have to be watched. Now, the best way to encourage somebody isn't the way that I had experience with with my parents, that is, yelling and ranting about it. The best way is to treat your kids like you want to be treated. Be their friends. Be open with them. Give them the benefit of the doubt. In doing this, you'll truly create a mutually open relationship with them.
I know you're very worried about the harm that could come to your kids, with a silent telephone to nign anyone. But please remember, these sorts of things are blown WAY out of proportion by the media. When I read stories about kids getting into deep shit on the net, one thing always seems to be evident: *They were asking for it*. Teach you kids not to ask for it. You'll have far better luck than just preventing them from asking.
Thanks.
That's only if it's encrypted with CSS, which it isn't. Playing DVDs isn't illegal, only decrypting them is, but they almost all are encypted.
Parallax has a wonderful line of cheap, easy to program, microcontrollers called stamps. The low-end one is about $25 if I recall, and it's about everything you need.
http://www.parallax.com/
He who says "Good grief" and put this in Humor, appearently has never lost data.
/me breaks down and sobs.
And that's all I'm going to say about that.
You should give emacs a try. No, really.
:-)
Emacs is small, fast, extensable, easy to use, efficient, and runs on both Linux and Windows.
It is basicaly everything you said you want. It beats the socks off Visual Studio, or can be made to emulate it. Your pick. Once you learn emacs, you will constantly become more productive as you tweak it and learn new little corners you never knew about before. The motto of every emacs user:
"I have used emacs for many years, but have not yet reached its full potential".
On the other hand, emacs is very simple for the new user. You don't have to know anything fancy at first. Just learn a few simple commands from the built-in tutorial, and you'll be on your way. Pick up new tricks as you go along.
Emacs is everything you want in an IDE.
Swing is a GUI toolkit that is part of J2SE. This is what most people are talking about when they say 'client-side Java'. But Java is a fine language apart from the whole Grand Unified Platform bit. A Java program talking to QT, wxWindows, Cocoa or something like that, has no major impedements, and performence is not an issue.
Swing, on the other hand, is brain-dead, ugly, and slower than cold tar. Never, ever use Swing. You're giving Java a bad name. Swing is obnoxtous for programmers, and frustrates users by being unresponsive (prime example: ArgoUML, which is so slow it's literally unusable on my i686). JEdit is also too slow. Furthermore, Swing programs don't fit correctly in desktops, especially Mac OS X.
Use QT or wxWindows with Java or Python, and you'll be fine.
Let us not forget Plex86, which is a virtualizer like VMWare, but is free.
http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/plex86/
Quest has a fiber line within a 3 minute walk of my house, but the only thing close to affordable is icky AT&T Cable, as far as I know.
Exactly. For while stripping a document of well-known markup is trivial, adding markup to a loosely-formed collection of formatting kludges designed only so that humans can see them is hard.
And it would be okay if they just made this mistake in the past and their new books are marked up. But they seem to have (and maybe this isn't their intention; it's just how they sound to me) this attitude, almost elitist, that markup is a Bad Thing and that ASCII is the One True Format and they aren't even going to think about switching to anything else, ever.
About 2 months ago a bought the most expensive mouse I have ever owned. FredMayer's had it on sale for $10. The Microsoft Wheel Mouse Optical USB, in addition to the red light underneeth, has a *extra* red light in the back (or whatever is called the side facing you), just so everybody knows that it is optical.
And while the real light dims when not used (which is very cool, BTW), the decoration light doesn't, so it is on, bugging me, and consuming power, 24x7.
I want to remove that thing.
Wait a minute! Isn't PHP like evil or something?
Programming languages may come and go, but good old fashion machine code will last as long as literature, very much like good old fasion ASCII text and good old fashion zip files with no meaningfull names.
I used Mac OS almost exclucivly, from 7.0 to 10.1, and still use it now-and-then. The 7.0 Mac was a Mac TV. My current Apple box is a first edition iMac DV; That's 400 Mhz G3 CPU, 100 MHz system bus, 196 MB RAM, 10 GB 5400 RPM hard disk ATI Rage128 AGP graphics, etc.
Mac OS 10.0 was rather unresponsive in the GUI. I think that most `MacOS is slow' compliants arise therefrom.
10.1 is vastly better. Moving windows around is indistiguishable from realtime (unless you have about 6 or more transparent window stacked atop each other, but when does that happen?). Resizing windows is better than Xfree 4.2.1 on my 686 SiS box.
Overall, the GUI has a feel of great boroqity, but also is very `polished' (exactly the opposite of X, which is crude and almost flemsy in feel). It sort of reminds me of Java. No, not Java programs or coding in Java or whatever, and Java isn't slow. I just always have this weird picture in my head of Java being like some kind of big huge thing that works perfectly and C being this small tiny thing that is far less elegent. I'm weird, though.
It feels, `together', you know? Even though resizing that iTunes window is around 4 frames per second, the way it doesn't flicker at all and the edges blend in with the background and stuff is SO vastly better than my KDE desktop, where you resize something and the decorations move quickly, but everything flickers around and the windows go blank for a moment and stuff.
Anyhoo, for actual computation and stuff it seems fast enough, but all that I do on my Linux box now.
The only reason I still have a Mac is for OmniGraffle, BTW.
The deal is: your saying that people should be sold a line at, say, 768kbps, on the assuption that they won't use it. But then, when they actually DO use the bandwidth that *they pay for*, you say "Oops, your using all the bandwidth we sold you, we'll have to charge you more for it", which isn't right. If I pay $70/month for a 786kbps line, then I should be able to use exactly up to but not exceeding 786kbps, on that line, for $70/month. Period. If I use less, maybe I should pay less. But otherwise it is falsity in advertising, to say I get some bandwidth for some price and then charge me more if I use the full bandwidth quoted to me. If they only want you to use a fraction of that, then that fraction is what should be quoted for the price. Kushish?
For a "largest ever" attack, there wasn't a lot of perfomance loss.
This message typed with Dvorak.
Java is similar to C++ like (um...something simple but slick) is similar to (some montrosity). So I'm not good at thinking of analogies. Sue me. :-)
Anyway, I also like Ruby. And in fact was pondering which I should chant at the end of that post. I describe Ruby often as, "What [Perl,Python,Smalltalk] should have been". It bogols me why Python is so much more populer than Ruby, when the later is so very better.
Exactly. Claris is an artifact from the old days when Apple was less 'professional' and would do that kind of thing. It might still happen internally, but that would never get through the Jobs professionalism test that makes Mac OS X so boring.
C++ is clearly a work of the devil.
Java java java!!
My preview channel runs PowerPoint. Once some error happened (I don't remember the messaage), with the dialog being broadcasted for at least an hour. Then, they broadcasted the Pipes screensaver for the rest of the day.
This was a well-known shareware prank program.
Or how about:
:-D
"You can't modify a constant, float upstream, win an argument with the IRS, or satisfy this compiler."
Oh for the days when Apple had a since of humor.
Without a doubt, the books are at least 20 times better than the movie. Read them.
Yes, the first volume picks up rather slowly, but it gets really interesting in book three (Two Towers).
Oops...should have used preview. That's: http://slashdot.org/slashdot-should-cache-articles -its-going-to-slashdot
Notice that they are now redirecting requests to .
HA HA HA!
I've been using Ion off-and-on recently, trying to decide if I want to switch. It is very great. I didn't like posion, because (a) it brakes my web browser, Konquerer, and (b) I find it akward to use.
Ion is similar. You can have multipal frames on the screen at a time (which is good), but the frames never overlap. One thing to note is that multipal clients can be in the same frame (one shows up at a time). Each frame (or the whole screen if you only have one) has a row of tabs at the top, one for each client. It's great.
Here lives Ion.Recently I had the chance to read about the first 30 pages of a 'redbook' manual for the top-of-the-line pServer, which has several POWER4 CPUs. It was interesting.