You may unexpected errors when for some reason the string you use cannot be parsed, and you may get either an unexpected datatype or a truncated result when a parsed string would not match the other num you add to it (such as int a = x+5 where x is a string "3.5").
Thus proving that you have never, ever, programmed in Perl. But I'm glad that you can pass these dicta on what dynamically typed languages should and shouldn't do.
For the record: when a string being used as a number can't be parsed, it's 0 (yes, it's up to you to decide if you need to check if the string is a valid number - terrifying!). You cannot get an "unexpected data type", Perl scalars are polymorphic, they are strings or numbers (or references) based on context. So, with:
$a = "foo"; $b = $a + 0; $c = $a . "";
$b is 0, but $c is still "foo".
The original point was that since context decides how scalars are interpreted, addition isn't overloaded as concatenation for strings, but is a separate operator.
Yes, many people do find that to be more intuitive, and that's why this is useful.
"Equally, if Deckard really is a Nexus 7 created to work as an exterminator, why is he lacking the strength of the inferior Nexus 6 models he is chasing?"
Well, gee, if he is not supposed to know he's a replicant, super-human strength might be a bit of a give-away, no?
I have no idea what you are on about with the freezer baggies, I was just saying that it's pretty funny to open with "maybe I'm missing the sarcasm", and then proceed to miss said, blindingly obvious, sarcasm.
Nah, you couldn't possibly be. I mean, what a hilarious coincidence that the OP would bring up something that was in the article itself, without even realizing it!
1. Utterly moronic: a catchy term for the practice of outsourcing a job to an undefined, large group of people.
Re:I bought the dvd the day it came out
on
Futurama Returns!
·
· Score: 1
but it was just... enh. Not really bad, but not particularly good.
Don't you hate that? I was ready to love with all my heart, or hate it with a fiery passion, but instead it's just kinda "meh".
I think the main problem was trying to stretch an episode to an hour and a half, that's just not a good format for that kind of show. I really wish they had gone with the usual tactic of stringing together three mostly unrelated episodes with some flimsy pretext. If it ain't broke...
How much extra bandwidth would the internet have, if there was no spam bouncing around.
Ten billion spam messages, assuming an average size of 5Kb, works out to about 50TB a day. Compared to the entire internet I don't think that'll be noticeable.
To put it in perspective, that's about 12,000 DVD rips, or 2,270 people maxing out their 2Mbit cable connections for 24 hours. (Converting to standard LOCs is left as an exercise to the reader)
So, yeah, even if they meant 100 billion by "tens of billions" it's still negligible (unless I'm off by a few orders of magnitude somewhere).
"Number of Cellphones Now Equal To Half the Human Species" is perfectly valid and unambiguous. I don't see how you can read it as "Half of Human Species".
1. Convenience. You can do full text searches on every book in an eBook reader, an incredibly useful feature for anyone doing research or just looking up a particular term.
That's something computers are for - if I'm doing research, I'm not going to be doing it on a text reader.
2. Portability. You can carry a thousand books and also grab other content (newspapers, blogs, magazines, journals) in a unit the size of a paperback, which you can throw in a backpack, briefcase, etc.
Carrying around giant libraries of music (and video) makes sense, but people tend to read one book at a time.
3. Flexibility. You can download any document off the internet (PDF, DOC, TXT) and take it with you without having loose papers to worry about. Granted, the Kindle isn't well suited to this, but other eBook readers handle many formats natively.
This also tends to only make sense in the context of a portable computer of some kind (If I'm taking papers somewhere, I'm doing work; if I'm doing work, I want a computer, not a text reader).
4. Efficiency. It wastes a lot fewer resources to manufacture one eBook reader than to print, assemble, and ship hundreds or even thousands of physical books.
Could be. Although the vast majority of people seem to only buy a book or two a year, and gadgets like this get replaced every couple of years - could come out even in the end.
5. Turnaround. You can decide to purchase a new book whenever you like, without going to a store, waiting for a shipment, or printing a huge stack of paper on your laser printer. The Kindle even lets you buy a book from wherever you have mobile phone service, though I don't like their DRM model.
That is the only real, tangible advantage to these things that I can think of. (Of course the Kindle completely destroys it with the whole DRM business)
And even here, it's not like with music or movies - you'll be reading the book over a period of several days or weeks (or months), so being able to get one instantaneously isn't as big an advantage.
6. Usability. If you have poor eyesight you can adjust font sizes on the fly. If you're not in a position to read print you can play an audiobook.
Depends on the device, I suppose - when it comes down to plain comfort, real books have been pretty hard to beat for these things.
the paper book will become like the slide rule or the 35mm consumer camera: Still used and appreciated by some but more and more ignored by the masses.
I'm not buying it. Both of those examples are replaced by something that does the exact same function, but in a more powerful/easier to use manner; they have no intrinsic benefits over their replacements and the only reason to continue using them is nostalgia.
Whereas here, the new solution is not only searching for a problem in many situations, but is considerably worse in some. The main one being that it's very, very difficult to render a book unreadable, whereas these things have batteries and are very susceptible to physical damage or a splash of water; and people tend to read a lot away from home.
I do think these types of things will become a lot more popular, but not for all uses. For example, I can easily imagine most newspapers being delivered on such devices 10-15 years from now, but I can also easily see recreational reading sticking with actual books for some time. (Of course for all I know, all future exchange of information will go through Facebook, and this is all moot)
do you really think that RAM is irrelevant to emulation?
Well, yeah, of course it is. We are talking about emulating architectures, and the OP was saying that any general purpose architecture can emulate any other.
Whether or not any specific device will have the resources to run software targeted at any other specific device is, in fact, entirely irrelevant.
I bet you $1,000,000 you can't emulate my MacBook Pro on my Palm Z22. I'll make it easy for you - you can make your emulation as inefficient as you like.
Why on earth wouldn't you be able to emulate x86(-64) on ARM?
So a part of the premise is vaguely similar to that of a 10 year old movie? Yeah, might as well not bother. (I quite enjoyed Dark City; Rufus Sewell is a hugely underrated actor)
I don't expect Dollhouse to be anything but drivel.
A couple of scratches on a CD don't make that much difference
You don't understand! That's because the CD already lacks all of that infinite magical goodness that vinyl is full of! How can you damage something when it's already utterly destroyed during the production process?
Slashdot Mirror
Thus proving that you have never, ever, programmed in Perl. But I'm glad that you can pass these dicta on what dynamically typed languages should and shouldn't do.
For the record: when a string being used as a number can't be parsed, it's 0 (yes, it's up to you to decide if you need to check if the string is a valid number - terrifying!). You cannot get an "unexpected data type", Perl scalars are polymorphic, they are strings or numbers (or references) based on context. So, with: $b is 0, but $c is still "foo".
The original point was that since context decides how scalars are interpreted, addition isn't overloaded as concatenation for strings, but is a separate operator.
Yes, many people do find that to be more intuitive, and that's why this is useful.
You are right, it's almost as if they somehow knew about the anniversary and planned the release beforehand.
Spooky.
"I forgot."
Only works if you are part of the Executive branch. Or the Vice President.
Exactly! Newer technology is harder to implement and more expensive than old technology, that's why no new technology is ever adopted.
And the icon doesn't make sense.
The icon just means that the story has to do with patents. There aren't separate categories for good/bad/obvious/submarine/etc patents.
"Equally, if Deckard really is a Nexus 7 created to work as an exterminator, why is he lacking the strength of the inferior Nexus 6 models he is chasing?"
Well, gee, if he is not supposed to know he's a replicant, super-human strength might be a bit of a give-away, no?
I have no idea what you are on about with the freezer baggies, I was just saying that it's pretty funny to open with "maybe I'm missing the sarcasm", and then proceed to miss said, blindingly obvious, sarcasm.
maybe I'm missing the sarcasm...
Nah, you couldn't possibly be. I mean, what a hilarious coincidence that the OP would bring up something that was in the article itself, without even realizing it!
So...
catchy
adj., -ier, -iest.
1. Utterly moronic: a catchy term for the practice of outsourcing a job to an undefined, large group of people.
but it was just... enh. Not really bad, but not particularly good.
Don't you hate that? I was ready to love with all my heart, or hate it with a fiery passion, but instead it's just kinda "meh".
I think the main problem was trying to stretch an episode to an hour and a half, that's just not a good format for that kind of show. I really wish they had gone with the usual tactic of stringing together three mostly unrelated episodes with some flimsy pretext. If it ain't broke...
How much extra bandwidth would the internet have, if there was no spam bouncing around.
Ten billion spam messages, assuming an average size of 5Kb, works out to about 50TB a day. Compared to the entire internet I don't think that'll be noticeable.
To put it in perspective, that's about 12,000 DVD rips, or 2,270 people maxing out their 2Mbit cable connections for 24 hours. (Converting to standard LOCs is left as an exercise to the reader)
So, yeah, even if they meant 100 billion by "tens of billions" it's still negligible (unless I'm off by a few orders of magnitude somewhere).
Different types of relationships (ie not just bidirectional friends) would be a start.
Hmm...
Name: Ralph & Beatrice
Networks: FooU
Details: You had a threesome with Ralph & Beatrice in 2003.
[ edit details ]
Yep, would be very helpful.
"Number of Cellphones Now Equal To Half the Human Species" is perfectly valid and unambiguous. I don't see how you can read it as "Half of Human Species".
Also, since we are nitpicking, it's Homo sapiens.
Clearly, reading email is NOT violation of copyright.
TFA didn't say reading, but quoting the text of the email in the reply and forwarding it to other people.
So it seems "we as a whole" aren't very good at reading comprehension, to boot.
Ok, I'll take a crack.
1. Convenience. You can do full text searches on every book in an eBook reader, an incredibly useful feature for anyone doing research or just looking up a particular term.
That's something computers are for - if I'm doing research, I'm not going to be doing it on a text reader.
2. Portability. You can carry a thousand books and also grab other content (newspapers, blogs, magazines, journals) in a unit the size of a paperback, which you can throw in a backpack, briefcase, etc.
Carrying around giant libraries of music (and video) makes sense, but people tend to read one book at a time.
3. Flexibility. You can download any document off the internet (PDF, DOC, TXT) and take it with you without having loose papers to worry about. Granted, the Kindle isn't well suited to this, but other eBook readers handle many formats natively.
This also tends to only make sense in the context of a portable computer of some kind (If I'm taking papers somewhere, I'm doing work; if I'm doing work, I want a computer, not a text reader).
4. Efficiency. It wastes a lot fewer resources to manufacture one eBook reader than to print, assemble, and ship hundreds or even thousands of physical books.
Could be. Although the vast majority of people seem to only buy a book or two a year, and gadgets like this get replaced every couple of years - could come out even in the end.
5. Turnaround. You can decide to purchase a new book whenever you like, without going to a store, waiting for a shipment, or printing a huge stack of paper on your laser printer. The Kindle even lets you buy a book from wherever you have mobile phone service, though I don't like their DRM model.
That is the only real, tangible advantage to these things that I can think of. (Of course the Kindle completely destroys it with the whole DRM business)
And even here, it's not like with music or movies - you'll be reading the book over a period of several days or weeks (or months), so being able to get one instantaneously isn't as big an advantage.
6. Usability. If you have poor eyesight you can adjust font sizes on the fly. If you're not in a position to read print you can play an audiobook.
Depends on the device, I suppose - when it comes down to plain comfort, real books have been pretty hard to beat for these things.
the paper book will become like the slide rule or the 35mm consumer camera: Still used and appreciated by some but more and more ignored by the masses.
I'm not buying it. Both of those examples are replaced by something that does the exact same function, but in a more powerful/easier to use manner; they have no intrinsic benefits over their replacements and the only reason to continue using them is nostalgia.
Whereas here, the new solution is not only searching for a problem in many situations, but is considerably worse in some. The main one being that it's very, very difficult to render a book unreadable, whereas these things have batteries and are very susceptible to physical damage or a splash of water; and people tend to read a lot away from home.
I do think these types of things will become a lot more popular, but not for all uses. For example, I can easily imagine most newspapers being delivered on such devices 10-15 years from now, but I can also easily see recreational reading sticking with actual books for some time. (Of course for all I know, all future exchange of information will go through Facebook, and this is all moot)
Bullshit. Just in recent years we've gone to Afghanistan, Iraq, and soon, Iran!
do you really think that RAM is irrelevant to emulation?
Well, yeah, of course it is. We are talking about emulating architectures, and the OP was saying that any general purpose architecture can emulate any other.
Whether or not any specific device will have the resources to run software targeted at any other specific device is, in fact, entirely irrelevant.
I bet you $1,000,000 you can't emulate my MacBook Pro on my Palm Z22. I'll make it easy for you - you can make your emulation as inefficient as you like.
Why on earth wouldn't you be able to emulate x86(-64) on ARM?
I think you owe the Qemu guys some money: http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/qemu/status.html
The name ISS was needlessly gratuitous. The old name "Space Station Freedom" should have been retained
That name would've been needlessly hypocritical.
So, are they actually claiming this again, or do we just get to read about it again?
Besides, everyone knows Tesla did it, anyway.
or it will have the banter of shows like Buffy (hint: I never liked Buffy) and Dawson's Creek, which I equate to drivel
Got it - by "drivel" you mean shows you are not interested in (I thought you were talking about quality of writing at first).
So a part of the premise is vaguely similar to that of a 10 year old movie? Yeah, might as well not bother. (I quite enjoyed Dark City; Rufus Sewell is a hugely underrated actor)
I don't expect Dollhouse to be anything but drivel.
Based on what?
Ok, yes, I am a giant dork.
A couple of scratches on a CD don't make that much difference
You don't understand! That's because the CD already lacks all of that infinite magical goodness that vinyl is full of! How can you damage something when it's already utterly destroyed during the production process?
this comeback coupled with the surge in digital music sales could possibly close the door on CDs
Gee, I wonder which of the two is responsible for obsoleting CDs? The 7 new people who starting buying vinyl again, or everybody else?
(I know, I know: (-A Million, Redundant), but come on, this is pure, unadulterated stupid!)