No wonder this one won. ( wun wun? ) It is an elegant, easy to understand set-up with REALLY weird results. Something to smack your macro-world "common sense" upside the face.
"Like, huh? It's interfering with ITSELF? Like, is it a particle, or a wave, or what, teach?"
I think some of the crazy new laser "faster than light" experiments could probably give it a run for the money, but they are a lot harder to understand. There is nothing quite like the quantum world jumping up through your apparatus and presenting itself in all it's non-Newtonian glory.
How many strains of HIV are there (or that we know about), and what differences are there in their vectors, mechanisms, and effects?
Secondly, has there been any evidence that once infected with one strain, that there is a resistance to a new one? For example, if a Chimp is infected with SIV, is it less likely to become infected with HIV (or vice versa)?
Just wondering if any evidence has cropped up to suggest there is promise in William Gibson's "benign HIV+" idea (I think it was in Virtual Light).
It isn't up to the managers and designers to make sure the implementation is a good one. That is up to programmers. But the programmers CAN'T make a good piece of software out of a bad spec and bad design. That's like making a good movie from a bad script. I don't care WHO you cast, it is doomed from the start. Ditto s/w dev.
And me too. I was implying that truly elite programmers think about things deeply, then design, and THEN code. I have just noticed a tendency for geekdom to promote "seat of the pants" design. Which is right up there with improvisational interpretive dance with mimes.
Yeah, like that's ever going to happen. How would we know how elite a programmer was if he didn't just hear a problem and then work like a maniac for a week and pull a rabbit out of a hat? We can just work out the problems as they appear in the code as it is being produced. Easy.
Besides, a formal, methodical approach to software development is just so... arty! Nothing for the macho h4x0r to sink his yellowing teeth into. Real programmers just grab some wood and nails and start hammering. I mean, how many buildings can you name that were built on paper first?;P
You forgot to say which day, silly. And by the way you describe yourself, it look like you want a date, not a fight. Perhaps another/.'er from the NY area could help this guy get over his homophobia? I promise to pay for the condoms.
Of course the documentation will change. I forgot to mention how important docs are in the process of "change management". It's like war: no battle plan survives the first engagement with the enemy, but that is no reason not to have one. As long as you change the docs to reflect the new features/behaviour, there is no problem with docs "getting out of date" with respect to the code.
Besides, if you are writing the docs and someone notices a glaring issue, you can resolve it before telling someone to start coding. The earlier, the better. And you WILL do the same changes later in the project anyhow, with a few hundred percent increase in the workload.
This is why (most) programmers make horrible tech writers: they are too involved in the code to be concerned about issues that affect usability and project management.
Around these parts (Vancouver, Canada), the only people that play DDR are asian kids. It looks like fun, in the way that Karaoke is fun. (Which in my dictionary, is "marginally".)
The next step is for DDR to infect the minds of white folks. I expect to see long rows of these machines bringing in the line-dancing crowd in the very near future.
Whenever I see these claims of "better, stronger, faster" anti-copying schemes, I wonder if these guys are noticing that the counter-anti-copiers develop new tactics faster than a bacterium can split in two.
What would this scenario look like if we translated it into WarCraft 3?:
"I AM THE MIGHTY THRALL! SEE THE INPENETRABLE WALL OF TURRETS THAT SURROUND MY BASE! I AM INVINCIBLE! NO-ONE WOULD DARE... HEY! STOP THAT! NOOOO!! PLEASE!! STOP!! ARRRRRGGGH!"
I am more of a technical writer than a programmer (well, really, I'm not much of a programmer at all), but it was always clear to me that 90% of the software development headaches I lived with at various companies could have been resolved with minimal effort early in the project.. IF anyone cared about using a methodical approach to project documentation.
But nobody likes documentation. Writing it. Reading it. Just the word makes some people itch. For some reason, this is something that BOTH business managers and programmers don't get: documentation saves work. It is a way to produce a testable set of requirements, then a testable architecture/design, then a way to match up features and metrics in production and testing.
I mean, why does everybody think writing the manual is the LAST thing you do when you make software? With all the snarky "RTFM" comments I hear from geeks, I should start a new variant...
I love the quote about AOL-TW. Poor little beggars... don't know which way to go. Straddling a fence has got to be tough when you have thousands of people hanging off each leg. It's like "huh. so which way do we hold the knife to our throat? with the left hand, or the right?"
Serves them right for merging a content company and a service provider.
Hmmm... I like the idea of an Internet that "rings". But isn't it the "ringing" that we would like to get rid of from the net, in the same way we might wish the earth didn't "ring" so well during earthquakes?
What is the opposite of this model? Something like a marshmallow or ball of silly putty, that deforms to store energy and allows that energy to be released over time? I know that might affect the individual round-trip times, but it might improve efficiency on a larger scale.
I'm not sure what the rules for the nodes would be, but obviously there would have to be a way to balance "slack" and "stress" at different scales simultaneously, in order to avoid criticality. Anyone know about any models that have this kind of behaviour?
I said it once, I'll say it again:
BETAMAX != BETACAM.
If you worked in video, you would know that. Max was a market failure, period. BetaCam is an industry standard. They have nothing to do with each other.
Okay, if the cops get to watch us all the time with cameras, why don't they let us watch too? Why not put the closed circuit feed onto the net, or cable tv?
I mean, have you ever put a camera on a cop before? I have. They aren't exactly happy about it, and you can argue all you like, but they have intimidation down to a science.
But if they can watch us, why can't we watch them?
Ok, I'll bite: which version of Christianity is the correct one? Or rather, what subset of Christianity is true? Is it a binary thing, or a bell curve (ie: Greek Orthodox = 100% Catholic = 90%, Anglican = 75%, Baptist = 50%, Unitarian = 10%, etc.).
I am a Gnostic. Where does that put me on the scale of Truth, o wise AC?
Nice reply. You actually argued! And you disregarded my smart-assed tone! Wow!
Maybe there is hope for America after all. Well, no, I really don't believe that. Just wishful thinking. The second that Noam Chomsky gets major air time on a U.S. network, I will reconsider.
BTW: I'm Canadian. Born to hate America the way the twisted twin brother locked in the attic hates his All-star double. Kinda. But at least the view from up here extends beyond my navel.
I like how if you express an unpopular opinion, you are a troll. All I was saying is that the police in the U.S. are there to keep the poor in line and out of the lives of the rich. This is just an obvious extension of their foreign policy, turned inwards.
Go ahead, prove me wrong. Show me how the quality of life for an average U.S. citizen has been improving for the last 30 years. Because it hasn't. And don't blame a world economy that has slavishly followed the advice of American economic "experts".
Of COURSE people who want to make a lot of money move to the U.S. What better place to unleash your mercenary fervour? That's what the American Dream *is* after all: having more than the guy next to you. (After all, if everyone had about the same amount of stuff, how would you know who the winner was? And Yanks love winners. Exclusively.)
I mean, considering their attitude, I always thought "E Pluribus Unem" meant "Looking Out For Number One".
It serves no purpose to prosecute the wealthy for their crimes. The purpose of the American security establishment is to protect the rich from the poor. The best way to do that is to put the wretches in the Armed Forces or in prison. A War on Drugs is an excellent to selectively target them, and it has been very effective at turning a tenth of your population into criminals.
I am fascinated by the process you guys in the U.S. have going. Soon, you will have the full-blown Police State you have always secretly wished for. The rich will barricade themselves behind private security, and leave the underpaid cops to keep the rabble on their toes.
Until, of course, being rich means being a target for violence and/or high taxes, at which point they will leave the U.S. en masse, hide on some island, and leave you all to pick up the tab for the national debt. Too bad for anyone who can't afford an offshore bank account and an apartment in Singapore.
I look forward to seeing more of this American Dream. I will be sure to take notes and laugh. Just remember this... self-inflicted wounds deserve no pity.
Actually, yes. It is well known that poor people normally end up spending 100% of their money. Where do you think all the money McDonald's makes comes from? The Chattering Classes? No, welfare moms.
So yes, advertising to the poor is a very good idea. Especially if you want to keep them distracted and entertained. Opiate of the masses and all that.
Ok, so here's my idea. Which is a total 180 from everyone else I've read here so far. How about a channel that shows ONLY commercials? Hell, how about a DOZEN channels that show only commercials?
Seriously, I'm sure advertisers would love to pay people to watch their 30 second films. And you could choose which "kind" of commercials you wanted to watch by special interest, language, product type, etc.. I have found that the better commercials tend to be a lot more entertaining than your average Friends episode (I'm thinking best commercials in the World here, not just North America).
There might be some weird splash-over of people watching commercial for products that aren't available in their area (watching a stylish commercial for a Europe-only car or a funny Japanese toy commercial, for example), but the programming becomes REALLY simple when all you are doing is showing one 30 second spot after another... this might mean we now need Ad Jockeys (grimace).
The purpose of these channels (which could actually be fun to watch), would be to pay for the non-commercial channels bundled with them. So, if you watch x commercials, your cable is free (or cheap, rather).
Don't want to watch the commercials? Just pay the difference. Poor white trash? Make a little money while you sit on your ass. Everyone is a winner. Or not, as the case may be.
Not dissing, man, but your sig isn't quite right. Instead of saying "tsardonic" is says "chardanik". Try using the "tsa" letter (looks like a right-angle "U" with a little hook on the bottom right). Just so you know.
Slashdot Mirror
No wonder this one won. ( wun wun? ) It is an elegant, easy to understand set-up with REALLY weird results. Something to smack your macro-world "common sense" upside the face.
"Like, huh? It's interfering with ITSELF? Like, is it a particle, or a wave, or what, teach?"
I think some of the crazy new laser "faster than light" experiments could probably give it a run for the money, but they are a lot harder to understand. There is nothing quite like the quantum world jumping up through your apparatus and presenting itself in all it's non-Newtonian glory.
Two questions:
How many strains of HIV are there (or that we know about), and what differences are there in their vectors, mechanisms, and effects?
Secondly, has there been any evidence that once infected with one strain, that there is a resistance to a new one? For example, if a Chimp is infected with SIV, is it less likely to become infected with HIV (or vice versa)?
Just wondering if any evidence has cropped up to suggest there is promise in William Gibson's "benign HIV+" idea (I think it was in Virtual Light).
It isn't up to the managers and designers to make sure the implementation is a good one. That is up to programmers. But the programmers CAN'T make a good piece of software out of a bad spec and bad design. That's like making a good movie from a bad script. I don't care WHO you cast, it is doomed from the start. Ditto s/w dev.
They look pretty 'l33t to me
And me too. I was implying that truly elite programmers think about things deeply, then design, and THEN code. I have just noticed a tendency for geekdom to promote "seat of the pants" design. Which is right up there with improvisational interpretive dance with mimes.
Yeah, like that's ever going to happen. How would we know how elite a programmer was if he didn't just hear a problem and then work like a maniac for a week and pull a rabbit out of a hat? We can just work out the problems as they appear in the code as it is being produced. Easy.
;P
Besides, a formal, methodical approach to software development is just so... arty! Nothing for the macho h4x0r to sink his yellowing teeth into. Real programmers just grab some wood and nails and start hammering. I mean, how many buildings can you name that were built on paper first?
Thanks! I never heard that term before, so I wouldn't have known to look for it. You are the most helpful AC I've encountered so far. :)
You forgot to say which day, silly. And by the way you describe yourself, it look like you want a date, not a fight. Perhaps another /.'er from the NY area could help this guy get over his homophobia? I promise to pay for the condoms.
Of course the documentation will change. I forgot to mention how important docs are in the process of "change management". It's like war: no battle plan survives the first engagement with the enemy, but that is no reason not to have one. As long as you change the docs to reflect the new features/behaviour, there is no problem with docs "getting out of date" with respect to the code.
Besides, if you are writing the docs and someone notices a glaring issue, you can resolve it before telling someone to start coding. The earlier, the better. And you WILL do the same changes later in the project anyhow, with a few hundred percent increase in the workload.
This is why (most) programmers make horrible tech writers: they are too involved in the code to be concerned about issues that affect usability and project management.
Yes, I'm talking to you. I wish I could find out where you live so me and Steve could come over and hang out with you for a minute or two.
Around these parts (Vancouver, Canada), the only people that play DDR are asian kids. It looks like fun, in the way that Karaoke is fun. (Which in my dictionary, is "marginally".)
The next step is for DDR to infect the minds of white folks. I expect to see long rows of these machines bringing in the line-dancing crowd in the very near future.
That has to be one of the funniest disses to h4x0r-speak I have ever seen. Take a bow, NG.
Whenever I see these claims of "better, stronger, faster" anti-copying schemes, I wonder if these guys are noticing that the counter-anti-copiers develop new tactics faster than a bacterium can split in two.
What would this scenario look like if we translated it into WarCraft 3?:
"I AM THE MIGHTY THRALL! SEE THE INPENETRABLE WALL OF TURRETS THAT SURROUND MY BASE! I AM INVINCIBLE! NO-ONE WOULD DARE... HEY! STOP THAT! NOOOO!! PLEASE!! STOP!! ARRRRRGGGH!"
I am more of a technical writer than a programmer (well, really, I'm not much of a programmer at all), but it was always clear to me that 90% of the software development headaches I lived with at various companies could have been resolved with minimal effort early in the project.. IF anyone cared about using a methodical approach to project documentation.
But nobody likes documentation. Writing it. Reading it. Just the word makes some people itch. For some reason, this is something that BOTH business managers and programmers don't get: documentation saves work. It is a way to produce a testable set of requirements, then a testable architecture/design, then a way to match up features and metrics in production and testing.
I mean, why does everybody think writing the manual is the LAST thing you do when you make software? With all the snarky "RTFM" comments I hear from geeks, I should start a new variant...
"PUHLEASE! BEFORE YOU START CODING, WTFM!"
I love the quote about AOL-TW. Poor little beggars... don't know which way to go. Straddling a fence has got to be tough when you have thousands of people hanging off each leg. It's like "huh. so which way do we hold the knife to our throat? with the left hand, or the right?"
Serves them right for merging a content company and a service provider.
Hmmm... I like the idea of an Internet that "rings". But isn't it the "ringing" that we would like to get rid of from the net, in the same way we might wish the earth didn't "ring" so well during earthquakes?
What is the opposite of this model? Something like a marshmallow or ball of silly putty, that deforms to store energy and allows that energy to be released over time? I know that might affect the individual round-trip times, but it might improve efficiency on a larger scale.
I'm not sure what the rules for the nodes would be, but obviously there would have to be a way to balance "slack" and "stress" at different scales simultaneously, in order to avoid criticality. Anyone know about any models that have this kind of behaviour?
I said it once, I'll say it again: BETAMAX != BETACAM. If you worked in video, you would know that. Max was a market failure, period. BetaCam is an industry standard. They have nothing to do with each other.
There is Digital BetaCam. There is no Digital BetaMax. They are completely different formats.
Okay, if the cops get to watch us all the time with cameras, why don't they let us watch too? Why not put the closed circuit feed onto the net, or cable tv? I mean, have you ever put a camera on a cop before? I have. They aren't exactly happy about it, and you can argue all you like, but they have intimidation down to a science. But if they can watch us, why can't we watch them?
Ok, I'll bite: which version of Christianity is the correct one? Or rather, what subset of Christianity is true? Is it a binary thing, or a bell curve (ie: Greek Orthodox = 100% Catholic = 90%, Anglican = 75%, Baptist = 50%, Unitarian = 10%, etc.).
I am a Gnostic. Where does that put me on the scale of Truth, o wise AC?
Nice reply. You actually argued! And you disregarded my smart-assed tone! Wow!
Maybe there is hope for America after all. Well, no, I really don't believe that. Just wishful thinking. The second that Noam Chomsky gets major air time on a U.S. network, I will reconsider.
BTW: I'm Canadian. Born to hate America the way the twisted twin brother locked in the attic hates his All-star double. Kinda. But at least the view from up here extends beyond my navel.
I like how if you express an unpopular opinion, you are a troll. All I was saying is that the police in the U.S. are there to keep the poor in line and out of the lives of the rich. This is just an obvious extension of their foreign policy, turned inwards.
Go ahead, prove me wrong. Show me how the quality of life for an average U.S. citizen has been improving for the last 30 years. Because it hasn't. And don't blame a world economy that has slavishly followed the advice of American economic "experts".
Of COURSE people who want to make a lot of money move to the U.S. What better place to unleash your mercenary fervour? That's what the American Dream *is* after all: having more than the guy next to you. (After all, if everyone had about the same amount of stuff, how would you know who the winner was? And Yanks love winners. Exclusively.)
I mean, considering their attitude, I always thought "E Pluribus Unem" meant "Looking Out For Number One".
It serves no purpose to prosecute the wealthy for their crimes. The purpose of the American security establishment is to protect the rich from the poor. The best way to do that is to put the wretches in the Armed Forces or in prison. A War on Drugs is an excellent to selectively target them, and it has been very effective at turning a tenth of your population into criminals.
I am fascinated by the process you guys in the U.S. have going. Soon, you will have the full-blown Police State you have always secretly wished for. The rich will barricade themselves behind private security, and leave the underpaid cops to keep the rabble on their toes.
Until, of course, being rich means being a target for violence and/or high taxes, at which point they will leave the U.S. en masse, hide on some island, and leave you all to pick up the tab for the national debt. Too bad for anyone who can't afford an offshore bank account and an apartment in Singapore.
I look forward to seeing more of this American Dream. I will be sure to take notes and laugh. Just remember this... self-inflicted wounds deserve no pity.
Actually, yes. It is well known that poor people normally end up spending 100% of their money. Where do you think all the money McDonald's makes comes from? The Chattering Classes? No, welfare moms.
So yes, advertising to the poor is a very good idea. Especially if you want to keep them distracted and entertained. Opiate of the masses and all that.
Ok, so here's my idea. Which is a total 180 from everyone else I've read here so far. How about a channel that shows ONLY commercials? Hell, how about a DOZEN channels that show only commercials?
Seriously, I'm sure advertisers would love to pay people to watch their 30 second films. And you could choose which "kind" of commercials you wanted to watch by special interest, language, product type, etc.. I have found that the better commercials tend to be a lot more entertaining than your average Friends episode (I'm thinking best commercials in the World here, not just North America).
There might be some weird splash-over of people watching commercial for products that aren't available in their area (watching a stylish commercial for a Europe-only car or a funny Japanese toy commercial, for example), but the programming becomes REALLY simple when all you are doing is showing one 30 second spot after another... this might mean we now need Ad Jockeys (grimace).
The purpose of these channels (which could actually be fun to watch), would be to pay for the non-commercial channels bundled with them. So, if you watch x commercials, your cable is free (or cheap, rather).
Don't want to watch the commercials? Just pay the difference. Poor white trash? Make a little money while you sit on your ass. Everyone is a winner. Or not, as the case may be.
Not dissing, man, but your sig isn't quite right. Instead of saying "tsardonic" is says "chardanik". Try using the "tsa" letter (looks like a right-angle "U" with a little hook on the bottom right). Just so you know.