Get yourself a couple of Shakespeare DVDs (the Brannah ones are quite good), sit back, and enjoy. Then once you know the basis of the story you'll find that the text is rather less opaque.
I wonder what Shakespeare would in fact have thought of his plays being made into movies. Obviously some movies are bad, and I can't imagine he would care to have his wording changed in most circumstances, since he took the time to write in iambic pentameter. But would he care for even the best of the movies? Watching a play on stage is a very different experience than watching a movie.
So, to the original poster, I'd say see if you can see some stage versions before (or instead of) reading. It's what Shakespeare intended, in any case.
I'm sure ESR would have gone to great lengths to validate the document before going public
Don't be so sure. According to ESR's statement: I cannot certify its authenticity, but I presume that IBM's, Red Hat's, Novell's, AutoZone's, and Daimler-Chryler's lawyers can subpoena the original.
So take it with a grain of salt. I'm sure ESR thinks it's authentic, but until someone can confirm its authenticity, don't believe it. In the end, it's better to be skeptical of surprising evidence than to instantly accept false claims.
There's a big difference between covering your ass and folding in the face of remote, unfounded threats. Has CEO "HeadSurfer" paid off the mafia? Has he given the protection money to the Yakuza contacts? Giving money to SCO is just as inane and reckless.
As long this guy is so willing to shell out big money to people brandishing idiotic threats, I may as well take a stab at it: Headsurfer! I have intellectual property in the linux kernel. Pay me $100,000 (I'm reasonable) and I promise not to sue.
Seems like a lot of these web "schools" that try to present all (or at least the common) facets of a subject are having trouble. Their product was access to content, and I think they've gone the way of most access providers.
When webmonkey (and others such as builder.com) started out, the web was such that it could be difficult to find resources about some topics. Thus, to have all these references collected in one place was pretty handy. Now, however, it's pretty easy to find resources (through google if nothing else) for just about anything, and you can get the resources from experts who are deeply involved with the topic (which may or may not be the case from one of the "schools").
So, like all other companies that make their money by providing access (e.g. ISPs, cable carriers), these schools must shift to instead offering a service. Granted, webmonkey did have somewhat of a service: Lots of n00b friendly articles all written in a similar format. But apparently that wasn't enough.
From the article description and pics, this seems to be a relatively simple concept, but nicely implemented. Although I can't read the article, I'm guessing that the "3d" effect is a much better version of those "holograms" that appear to move when you tilt at different angles (e.g. Ken Griffey player appears to swing when you tilt his baseball card). But instead of 2-3 images on a flat card, you have 24 images on a cylinder. Needless to say, it's not "real 3D" as none of 24 images themselves have depth.
Some people mentioned a strobing projector around a rotating screen as being the method used here. I wonder if also some sort of projector facing upward from below could be reflected laterally in 24 directions by a 24 sided mirror.
However, Java's OOP is a little limited in one aspect: it doesn't allow multiple inheritance. Although you can use interfaces to accomplish most of what you'd want to do, it is a bit clumsier (i.e. you must provide implementation in all the classes implementing an interface). I imagine generics/templates are Java's solution to allow code to be written once and reused elsewhere, when you don't want to sacrifice your one and only possible parent class.
Like you, though, I think it's a bad idea. I'd rather they had multiple inheritance.
Before you stick to instant coffee, you owe it to yourself to try something besides Starbucks coffee. Try brewing your own in a relatively cheap French Press, my preferred method. You can get a variety of sizes (1-4 cups o coffee, generally), and even ones that have a built in thermos. Just pour in coffee grounds and hot water, and you're all set! Bodum has a good selection and is quality, though you can find cheaper elsewhere.
The selection of coffee is also fairly important. You'll find a favorite eventually. Until then, though, if you just pick something that looks it has a nice bag, it's probably gonna taste better than Starbucks.
Oh, and don't get me wrong: I do drink Starbucks sometimes. There are good things about it: it is hot, strong, and caffienated. It just kinda tastes bad as well.
Actually, don't look to the EFF for help if you've been busted selling bootlegs. That's got little do with with the 'electronic frontier' after all. In fact, EFF appears to support this RIAA tactic. According to the article:
"The process of confiscating bootleg CDs from street vendors is exactly what the RIAA should be doing," said Jason Schultz, a staff attorney for the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF).
Senator Tom Harkin (D - Iowa) is a proponent of human cloning (not just stem cell research, mind you, but human cloning). He was in a public discussion a while ago with Doctor Ian Wilmut (the guy in charge of the Dolly sheep-cloning experiment). Wilmut said "it would be quite inhumane" to clone people. Harkin blasted him:
"Human cloning will take place and it will take place within my lifetime. I think it is right and proper.... It holds untold benefits for humankind in the future."
This is the NSA, not the Goober County Sheriff's office. If they can't calibrate, they realize they can't evaluate. The candidate is thus an unknown quantity. They look at the long line of applicants, most of whom are known quantities, and decide this one's not worth the trouble.
Where exactly do you get this insight into the methods of polygraph administrators? It may sound to you like a nice reasonable statement, but unless you can back it up, I'm afraid I don't believe you.
First of all, there's a decent chance that whoever giving your background poly is an ex-cop, as the government often farms background investigations (including polys) out to commercial agencies. Many people who work at these security firms are ex-cops.
Second (and here's I'm hypothesizing, but only to cast doubt on your statement), I find it difficult to believe that a background investigator can provide "Couldn't calibrate, so I didn't feel like it was worth the trouble" as a valid reason for rejecting someone's application. Anyone denied a security clearance may protest the decision (though some contents of the investigation become public record once they do), so the investigators have to have some reasonable basis for denial. This is a beauracratic government agency we are talking about.
As a side note, what does "This is the NSA, not the Goober County Sheriff's office" mean? I understand you are disparaging the fine law enforcement officers of Goober County, but why must we assume the NSA is the paragon of intelligence? As I'm sure you're aware, they are mainly staffed by government and military personnel, who generally aren't considered the most exemplary of employees. I don't mean to imply they are not clever people, but let us not automatically assume they are incapable of error. Some searches on the net should reveal plenty of (unclassified) goofs on their part.
I am here to tell you that is exactly why Linux is losing the desktop race.
Please don't tell people who are volunteering their time writing open source applications that their time would be better spent elsewhere. The reason Linux is as close to where it is on the desktop is because people have worked on the sort of things that interest them. You may be right: Maybe some other project would be more objectively useful. But on the other hand, if you were in charge, deciding who got to work on what project, nobody would want to work on open-source anymore, and Linux would suck pretty quick.
So let people do what they want, even if you think it's dumb. It's a community effort that is strong because people can work when, how, and on what they want.
Do you hang out at neighborhood cleanups telling people they should be volunteering their time at soup kitchens instead?
By the way, if you're a Gort fan, like I am, make sure you read Harry Bates's short story 'Farewell to the Master' upon which the movie 'The Day the Earth Stood Still' was based. In the story, the robot was named 'Gnut' (I guess the movie people didn't want everyone asking "Why is the robot named Newt?"). It's a very clever short story, and Gnut is a pretty complex character.
Also, speaking of 'Day the Earth Stood Still' there's a band from late 70's/early 80's named Klaatu, which I think has some of the best 'science fiction songs' ever written: Around the Universe in 80 Days, Little Nuetrino, Calling Occupants of Interplanetary Craft.
The sesame seeds contained in this package are inteded for consumption by the purchaser only. You hereby agree not to plant these seeds. Help us prevent plant piracy!
I visited Estonia about two months ago (I'm an American) and will be moving to Tallinn, the capital, in about three months. I was fortunate to meet an Estonian studying in western Maryland. She has to head back to Estonia soon to finish her degree, and I will be following her, working remotely for my current US employer.
I was very personally impressed with the internet infrastructure there. It was an encouraging sight to enter a very small town by car and see a sign that said "this area covered by public wireless internet". And if they weren't covered by wireless, one of the first informational signs you'd see as you entered a town was "Internet this way -->" (usually directing you to a library).
Of course, seeing signs is different than working and living there, but from visiting my friend's family members, it does seem that fast internet is ubiquitous and inexpensive.
ruins a current beneficial property
on
Making Change
·
· Score: 1
One of the nice things about the current set of denominations is that you can make change most efficiently (fewest coins) by starting with the highest denominations and moving down to pennies. For example, to make change of 36 cents, you start with 1 quarter, then 1 dime, then 1 penny. Three coins total.
However, with this newly proposed solution, this is not always the case. Using the above algorithm with the 1-5-18-25 denominations would yeild, 1 quarter, 2 nickels, 1 penny. However, the most efficient change is actually two 18-cent pieces.
So while it may yeild more efficient solutions, is it more difficult to compute that more efficient solution. Therefore, it may in fact lead to less efficient use.
It doesn't seem unlikely that there is relatively easy access to secret facilities, nor that the government fails to use appropriate security measures. Consider past events, such as a russian diplomat's tapping of a state department conference room in 1999 that went undiscovered for some time.
Give him a break.. He's got some points. And at least he's thinking about real and genuine problems. I see a lot of people commenting with the 'who needs 10 million lines of code?' shtick. Sounds familiar.
We're going to need to do things in a decade or two that would require 10 million lines of code (measured by current languages), just as the things we do now would require 10 million lines of code in 1960's languages.
The new languages and techniques that we have now provided ways for us to reduce the apparent complexity of programs. This guy is just looking for a way to do that again. Certainly there is room to disagree with his techniques for accomplishing this, but it is shortsighted to deny the problem.
thanks benjiboo
on
Effective Java
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
thanks for submitting a rare thing: a good slashdot book review. timothy, if you want us to pay any attention to these reviews, you need to keep the quality more like this one.
Saying Linux is becoming a lot like windows is pretty imprecise. What exactly does he think is becoming more like Windows? He says: "all the flavors of Linux and the open-source software that runs on it". That's an overly broad statement, if you ask me.
And he complains of featurism. Isn't featurism the great part of Linux? There's a tool for everything you could want in Linux, and that's _always_ been part of Linux. What's different about Linux is that you're usually not forced to pay a penalty (stability, performance, etc) for features you don't need, wheras with a Windows distribution, you're often forced to run silly programs/features that you don't want.
There are so many linux variations and configurations... I think he could easily find a setup that meets his needs. And the other people that (for whatever reason) want a windows like setup can have it too.
I have a copy of one of the earlier editions, and it quickly became one of the most ragged and tattered computer books i owned. Although there is more detailed info available in javadocs, having all the classes, methods, and members available in a print is very helpful. I found it much easier to quickly thumb to a certain class when I couldn't remember the order of some arguments or the name of an attribute.
Just note that no method or attribute descriptions are included in the book, just the method signatures or the attribute types. You have to already know basically what everything does (or be able to deduce it from names), and just use this to jog your memory. So despite what some other posters say, this isn't a beginner's book.
Slashdot Mirror
So, to the original poster, I'd say see if you can see some stage versions before (or instead of) reading. It's what Shakespeare intended, in any case.
Don't be so sure. According to ESR's statement: I cannot certify its authenticity, but I presume that IBM's, Red Hat's, Novell's, AutoZone's, and Daimler-Chryler's lawyers can subpoena the original.
So take it with a grain of salt. I'm sure ESR thinks it's authentic, but until someone can confirm its authenticity, don't believe it. In the end, it's better to be skeptical of surprising evidence than to instantly accept false claims.
There's a big difference between covering your ass and folding in the face of remote, unfounded threats. Has CEO "HeadSurfer" paid off the mafia? Has he given the protection money to the Yakuza contacts? Giving money to SCO is just as inane and reckless.
As long this guy is so willing to shell out big money to people brandishing idiotic threats, I may as well take a stab at it: Headsurfer! I have intellectual property in the linux kernel. Pay me $100,000 (I'm reasonable) and I promise not to sue.
Seems like a lot of these web "schools" that try to present all (or at least the common) facets of a subject are having trouble. Their product was access to content, and I think they've gone the way of most access providers.
When webmonkey (and others such as builder.com) started out, the web was such that it could be difficult to find resources about some topics. Thus, to have all these references collected in one place was pretty handy. Now, however, it's pretty easy to find resources (through google if nothing else) for just about anything, and you can get the resources from experts who are deeply involved with the topic (which may or may not be the case from one of the "schools").
So, like all other companies that make their money by providing access (e.g. ISPs, cable carriers), these schools must shift to instead offering a service. Granted, webmonkey did have somewhat of a service: Lots of n00b friendly articles all written in a similar format. But apparently that wasn't enough.
From the article description and pics, this seems to be a relatively simple concept, but nicely implemented. Although I can't read the article, I'm guessing that the "3d" effect is a much better version of those "holograms" that appear to move when you tilt at different angles (e.g. Ken Griffey player appears to swing when you tilt his baseball card). But instead of 2-3 images on a flat card, you have 24 images on a cylinder. Needless to say, it's not "real 3D" as none of 24 images themselves have depth.
Some people mentioned a strobing projector around a rotating screen as being the method used here. I wonder if also some sort of projector facing upward from below could be reflected laterally in 24 directions by a 24 sided mirror.
Like you, though, I think it's a bad idea. I'd rather they had multiple inheritance.
Before you stick to instant coffee, you owe it to yourself to try something besides Starbucks coffee. Try brewing your own in a relatively cheap French Press, my preferred method. You can get a variety of sizes (1-4 cups o coffee, generally), and even ones that have a built in thermos. Just pour in coffee grounds and hot water, and you're all set! Bodum has a good selection and is quality, though you can find cheaper elsewhere.
The selection of coffee is also fairly important. You'll find a favorite eventually. Until then, though, if you just pick something that looks it has a nice bag, it's probably gonna taste better than Starbucks.
Oh, and don't get me wrong: I do drink Starbucks sometimes. There are good things about it: it is hot, strong, and caffienated. It just kinda tastes bad as well.
You can still place telegrams. Western Union still delivers. They use Airborne personel to do the deliveries, and it takes one business day.
And is Brittish your British word for British?
Bruce, a great idea. Perhaps Dr Spock will need to add a chapter.
Is this a special deal you have with Univ. of Arizona, though? Are there resources for us everyday joes to freeze our kiddies' giblets?
Senator Tom Harkin (D - Iowa) is a proponent of human cloning (not just stem cell research, mind you, but human cloning). He was in a public discussion a while ago with Doctor Ian Wilmut (the guy in charge of the Dolly sheep-cloning experiment). Wilmut said "it would be quite inhumane" to clone people. Harkin blasted him:
... It holds untold benefits for humankind in the future."
"Human cloning will take place and it will take place within my lifetime. I think it is right and proper.
Article about it
This is the NSA, not the Goober County Sheriff's office. If they can't calibrate, they realize they can't evaluate. The candidate is thus an unknown quantity. They look at the long line of applicants, most of whom are known quantities, and decide this one's not worth the trouble.
Where exactly do you get this insight into the methods of polygraph administrators? It may sound to you like a nice reasonable statement, but unless you can back it up, I'm afraid I don't believe you.
First of all, there's a decent chance that whoever giving your background poly is an ex-cop, as the government often farms background investigations (including polys) out to commercial agencies. Many people who work at these security firms are ex-cops.
Second (and here's I'm hypothesizing, but only to cast doubt on your statement), I find it difficult to believe that a background investigator can provide "Couldn't calibrate, so I didn't feel like it was worth the trouble" as a valid reason for rejecting someone's application. Anyone denied a security clearance may protest the decision (though some contents of the investigation become public record once they do), so the investigators have to have some reasonable basis for denial. This is a beauracratic government agency we are talking about.
As a side note, what does "This is the NSA, not the Goober County Sheriff's office" mean? I understand you are disparaging the fine law enforcement officers of Goober County, but why must we assume the NSA is the paragon of intelligence? As I'm sure you're aware, they are mainly staffed by government and military personnel, who generally aren't considered the most exemplary of employees. I don't mean to imply they are not clever people, but let us not automatically assume they are incapable of error. Some searches on the net should reveal plenty of (unclassified) goofs on their part.
I am here to tell you that is exactly why Linux is losing the desktop race.
Please don't tell people who are volunteering their time writing open source applications that their time would be better spent elsewhere. The reason Linux is as close to where it is on the desktop is because people have worked on the sort of things that interest them. You may be right: Maybe some other project would be more objectively useful. But on the other hand, if you were in charge, deciding who got to work on what project, nobody would want to work on open-source anymore, and Linux would suck pretty quick.
So let people do what they want, even if you think it's dumb. It's a community effort that is strong because people can work when, how, and on what they want.
Do you hang out at neighborhood cleanups telling people they should be volunteering their time at soup kitchens instead?
By the way, if you're a Gort fan, like I am, make sure you read Harry Bates's short story 'Farewell to the Master' upon which the movie 'The Day the Earth Stood Still' was based. In the story, the robot was named 'Gnut' (I guess the movie people didn't want everyone asking "Why is the robot named Newt?"). It's a very clever short story, and Gnut is a pretty complex character.
Someone has the story online.
Also, speaking of 'Day the Earth Stood Still' there's a band from late 70's/early 80's named Klaatu, which I think has some of the best 'science fiction songs' ever written: Around the Universe in 80 Days, Little Nuetrino, Calling Occupants of Interplanetary Craft.
Ok, I didn't realize until now that I'm a fanboy.
The sesame seeds contained in this package are inteded for consumption by the purchaser only. You hereby agree not to plant these seeds. Help us prevent plant piracy!
I visited Estonia about two months ago (I'm an American) and will be moving to Tallinn, the capital, in about three months. I was fortunate to meet an Estonian studying in western Maryland. She has to head back to Estonia soon to finish her degree, and I will be following her, working remotely for my current US employer.
I was very personally impressed with the internet infrastructure there. It was an encouraging sight to enter a very small town by car and see a sign that said "this area covered by public wireless internet". And if they weren't covered by wireless, one of the first informational signs you'd see as you entered a town was "Internet this way -->" (usually directing you to a library).
Of course, seeing signs is different than working and living there, but from visiting my friend's family members, it does seem that fast internet is ubiquitous and inexpensive.
One of the nice things about the current set of denominations is that you can make change most efficiently (fewest coins) by starting with the highest denominations and moving down to pennies. For example, to make change of 36 cents, you start with 1 quarter, then 1 dime, then 1 penny. Three coins total.
However, with this newly proposed solution, this is not always the case. Using the above algorithm with the 1-5-18-25 denominations would yeild, 1 quarter, 2 nickels, 1 penny. However, the most efficient change is actually two 18-cent pieces.
So while it may yeild more efficient solutions, is it more difficult to compute that more efficient solution. Therefore, it may in fact lead to less efficient use.
It's certainly not failsafe legal protection, but Gnuntella's open source nature appear to give it some legal advantages.
It doesn't seem unlikely that there is relatively easy access to secret facilities, nor that the government fails to use appropriate security measures. Consider past events, such as a russian diplomat's tapping of a state department conference room in 1999 that went undiscovered for some time.
Give him a break.. He's got some points. And at least he's thinking about real and genuine problems. I see a lot of people commenting with the 'who needs 10 million lines of code?' shtick. Sounds familiar.
We're going to need to do things in a decade or two that would require 10 million lines of code (measured by current languages), just as the things we do now would require 10 million lines of code in 1960's languages.
The new languages and techniques that we have now provided ways for us to reduce the apparent complexity of programs. This guy is just looking for a way to do that again. Certainly there is room to disagree with his techniques for accomplishing this, but it is shortsighted to deny the problem.
thanks for submitting a rare thing: a good slashdot book review. timothy, if you want us to pay any attention to these reviews, you need to keep the quality more like this one.
Saying Linux is becoming a lot like windows is pretty imprecise. What exactly does he think is becoming more like Windows? He says: "all the flavors of Linux and the open-source software that runs on it". That's an overly broad statement, if you ask me.
And he complains of featurism. Isn't featurism the great part of Linux? There's a tool for everything you could want in Linux, and that's _always_ been part of Linux. What's different about Linux is that you're usually not forced to pay a penalty (stability, performance, etc) for features you don't need, wheras with a Windows distribution, you're often forced to run silly programs/features that you don't want.
There are so many linux variations and configurations... I think he could easily find a setup that meets his needs. And the other people that (for whatever reason) want a windows like setup can have it too.
I have a copy of one of the earlier editions, and it quickly became one of the most ragged and tattered computer books i owned. Although there is more detailed info available in javadocs, having all the classes, methods, and members available in a print is very helpful. I found it much easier to quickly thumb to a certain class when I couldn't remember the order of some arguments or the name of an attribute.
Just note that no method or attribute descriptions are included in the book, just the method signatures or the attribute types. You have to already know basically what everything does (or be able to deduce it from names), and just use this to jog your memory. So despite what some other posters say, this isn't a beginner's book.