I have to wonder about calling isLeapYear(year) every single time when if the last year was a leap year you have three guaranteed non-leap years and a leap year except for 3 years out of every 400.
Soooo. If this is the code and the flaw, why were only 30 GB Firmware 3.x Zunes affected?
Meanwhile, imagine the jollity as the advertisers discover they just lost Los Angeles, New York, Milwaukee, etc., consumers in a recession. Make-goods so fewer people can see more of your spots, oh yeah, that'll fly.
Nikki Finke at Deadline Hollywood Deadline picked up an interesting point from the Judge's ruling. Apparently the producer, Lawrence Gordon, on counsel's advice and invoking attorney/client privilege wouldn't testify as to his acquisition of his rights. One side not offering any evidence, perhaps, sped up the decision.
And the other sites that sell DRM-free do so because the record companies allowed it. There are two reasons. One, the other sites are limited to 20% of the market if they cannot sell tracks that are DRM prevented from installing on iPods. Second, the record companies lifted the restrictions on competitors in order to attempt to reduce Apple's market share so that Apple and the iTunes music store have less power over the pricing.
I've been following along this semester's CS61A Lectures by Dr. Brian Harvey out of UC Berkeley (audio and video podcast). He devotes two lectures to a 20 some year old videotape of Alan Kay talking about the coalescing of OOP principals in SmallTalk. Kay makes an important point: at different ages we learn differently. He also shows kids doing clever things with drawing and computer animation and they do it by writing programs. Look for Sept. 12 and 15.
I also found a book from Apress "Squeak, Learn Programming With Robots" which I think is very good, once one gets over the disappointment that the robots are graphics producers and not metal crushing monsters or lovable rogues, a la Bender Bender Rodriguez. Author: Stephane Ducasse. ISBN 1-59059-491-6
Yes, we know that the Gutmann paper is flawed. However, up above we see you say "not a reputable source for.. anything related to Vista at all." and "Some of his points are admittedly valid."
So, regarding this particular topic is Gutmann on point or not?
My question is, why was everyone jumping up and down about how clever they were in sending graphics rendering out the video card's GPU when it's seemingly real clever when Microsoft puts it back in the CPU? What am I not getting?
Of course it can compete. It's something that targets a partly intersecting market and utilizes different soft technologies. I'd worry a lot more about someone who is arrriving with their new line of $400 Windows machines.
First of all, from the device manufacturer's point of view, it's a cost to write and then test every driver for its line against the Win7 beta. Every time a new beta or rc build comes out, another round of testing and possible rewriting until final release so as to make the earliest migrators who have bought the devices happy.
Meanwhile, don't manufacturers use new releases of Windows to push people towards buying new devices? In any case, for the money spent, not one dollar of revenue will be realized until someone buys that device new for their Win7 upgrade or OEM purchase. And device makers should spend this money now to be ready on Win7 D-Day-1 without return so Microsoft looks good?
In order to be somewhat constructive, I invite you to complete the following thoughts: (1) Money talks... and (2) Were Redmond to pay device makers for pre-release writing and testing...
Yes, this decade has been about TCDGADA (The customers do give a damn about:). First networking inflexibility, then security, then interface, then performance. Now if we can hold their feet to the fire about crippleware (five editions, only one with the all the features that matter), file formats, and equitable interoperability, Windows might become a product we work with instead of around.
Demonstrating interface is tricky especially as the particulars change. Maybe as the students think about how to stop a bicycle and a car?
As to algorithm and execution, get a cook book page and show how a recipe relates to a program. How the instructions declare the variables and provide the algorithm. (How the recipe consists of steps in an interpreted language in that when it says "caramelize the onions" the experienced chef knows what to physically do.) How the kitchen is the computer; the chef is the I/O bus; the range, oven and mixers are processors; the mixing bowls and counters are RAM; and the refrigerator and pantry are persisted memory while the grocery is costly slow memory. If the receipe said a tablespoon of salt when it meant teaspoon, that would be a type of programing bug. It wouldn't hurt, at that point, to mention Dr. Knuth who provided us with the algorithm = recipe connection.
What constitutes music geek bona fides? I know my way around guitars, keyboards, and the clarinet, I've written songs, recorded, and played out. While the names C# and F# are musical puns I think the C does double duty as an allusion to, well, C and C++, and I think the F refers to functional, which is why, I guess, the.net hooked in OCaml fork got that musical note. Maybe D# will be the name of the declarative.net language. Build it around mozart and there some real musical punnerage.
Though here, C# is to java as F# is to OCaml, and one wonders if the selection of OCaml as the syntactic base had to do with merits or license. As to Hjelsberg, who is legitimately a language superstar, I've been reading suggestions that some of the major elements of.net 2 and greater were necessitated by the desire to get a functional language into the.net universe and the F# developers did the major work in extending the platform. C# is now tilting towards functional. Though as I have been reading up on how to use scala (java meets functional) I'm coming to a point of view that bolting functional paradigms to an existing C-esque language means a lot of developers for a decade will be writing imperativonal code as the familiar syntax lulls one into using the familiar imperative techniques.
A radio station's FCC license limits the licensee to a particular frequency and power rating. The power rating is limited so as to allow multiple transmitters to use the same frequency. For FM signals, height above average terrain is also considered and the higher the transmitter, the lower the allowed power. On the AM band, most stations are required, in recognition of the way the AM signal travels better at night, to lower power at sunset and raise power at sunrise. FCC rules say a transmitter has to operate at near its licensed power and it is a fineable offense to broadcast too far below and too far above what is allowed.
No offense, but Mr. Laporte was going to spend that time talking about something. Did Mr. Laporte think better of Microsoft after the ads?
First point to consider: if one is posting at slashdot, one knows too much to be the target audience for the campaign. It doesn't matter if we are talking about the ad because we have too much invested with regards to the reasons we like or dislike Microsoft and its products.
Second point to consider (and if I were a stockholder in Microsoft, I'd be adding this to the list of other money-wasting ideas) is that Microsoft earlier this year apparently decided that they weren't liked enough. Most people run ad campaigns because they aren't profitable enough, but we've seen the financials. Now a likability campaign looks like the sort of stuff that the oil companies or Archer Daniels Midland run. Microsoft's campaign has the hint of committee build, because it seems to be about likability at some times, seems to be about telling the world that Vista is good at other moments, and wants to out-cool Apple at other times. Now if I were an ad agency and presented with those goals, the one I'd de-emphasize is the one related to Vista. Why? Because results are measured with dollars in the bank. The achievement of feel-good goals are tested via before and after surveys and negative results may be rationalized away as caused by external factors. ("Well, everyone was worried about the stock market that week...") The super-cool goal is validated when they are nominated for awards next year and by that time, if the trophies are not forthcoming, well, the client approved the spot, the awards are political, or the awards givers just didn't get it, and, any way, the checks have cleared.
Which raises a question. The lowest end Wintel systems are less expensive than the personal Macs. I think that suggests Macs are more profitable as measured in dollars. So if the WGs succeed in harassing, I mean, educating the customers looking at Macs and turn $1200 sales into $400 sales, is Best Buy really going to be happy they let the Gates's Gurus onto the floor? Do the robot if you disagree. The funky chicken means you're on my page.
Apparently people misunderstood my language: I think storage of waste is a serious and peculiar problem and should not be overlooked while positive arguments related to current costs and current environmental advantages are made and weighed. Since I've been watching this debate for thirty years, it seems to me that advocates have consistently understated costs and have overlooked liability limitations established by law. Water requirements for a plant tend to be ignored and out here in the West water has been a problem that isn't that far from becoming a crisis.
I wouldn't have mentioned anything but a story about a solar power facility in SLO is met quickly with a snarky comment about how a nuclear facility would have been smaller. And I'm the one overlooking salient points in the debate by mentioning waste? I repeat, there is a nuclear power plant in San Luis Obispo. I presume that when PG&E was siting it in the late 60s, early 70s, Diablo Canyon was the best location between San Francisco and Point Concepcion. SLO County has a lot of open land as well. As I further think about it, the argument for nuclear power is not diminished by putting other generating sources on line.
And we wave away the pesky protection and isolation of waste while it cools for a time longer than our history of recognizable civilization. San Luis Obispo already has a nuclear power plant, by the way.
Slashdot Mirror
I have to wonder about calling isLeapYear(year) every single time when if the last year was a leap year you have three guaranteed non-leap years and a leap year except for 3 years out of every 400.
Soooo. If this is the code and the flaw, why were only 30 GB Firmware 3.x Zunes affected?
Meanwhile, imagine the jollity as the advertisers discover they just lost Los Angeles, New York, Milwaukee, etc., consumers in a recession. Make-goods so fewer people can see more of your spots, oh yeah, that'll fly.
Isn't this what they call a popcorn moment?
Nikki Finke at Deadline Hollywood Deadline picked up an interesting point from the Judge's ruling. Apparently the producer, Lawrence Gordon, on counsel's advice and invoking attorney/client privilege wouldn't testify as to his acquisition of his rights. One side not offering any evidence, perhaps, sped up the decision.
I would flag this as among the second-tier. Paul Graham's books, especially "On Lisp" are better.
And the other sites that sell DRM-free do so because the record companies allowed it. There are two reasons. One, the other sites are limited to 20% of the market if they cannot sell tracks that are DRM prevented from installing on iPods. Second, the record companies lifted the restrictions on competitors in order to attempt to reduce Apple's market share so that Apple and the iTunes music store have less power over the pricing.
Will Newscorp survive without Rupert Murdoch?
Kill 'em with carbs.
circletimessquare was on the queso.
A loser for being in Wahoo's or for blogging from there? I ask because I've done one of those things.
I've been following along this semester's CS61A Lectures by Dr. Brian Harvey out of UC Berkeley (audio and video podcast). He devotes two lectures to a 20 some year old videotape of Alan Kay talking about the coalescing of OOP principals in SmallTalk. Kay makes an important point: at different ages we learn differently. He also shows kids doing clever things with drawing and computer animation and they do it by writing programs. Look for Sept. 12 and 15.
I also found a book from Apress "Squeak, Learn Programming With Robots" which I think is very good, once one gets over the disappointment that the robots are graphics producers and not metal crushing monsters or lovable rogues, a la Bender Bender Rodriguez. Author: Stephane Ducasse. ISBN 1-59059-491-6
Yes, we know that the Gutmann paper is flawed. However, up above we see you say "not a reputable source for.. anything related to Vista at all." and "Some of his points are admittedly valid."
So, regarding this particular topic is Gutmann on point or not?
My question is, why was everyone jumping up and down about how clever they were in sending graphics rendering out the video card's GPU when it's seemingly real clever when Microsoft puts it back in the CPU? What am I not getting?
Of course it can compete. It's something that targets a partly intersecting market and utilizes different soft technologies. I'd worry a lot more about someone who is arrriving with their new line of $400 Windows machines.
Set to meet before the current administration leaves? Feels like a grease the wheels situation to me.
First of all, from the device manufacturer's point of view, it's a cost to write and then test every driver for its line against the Win7 beta. Every time a new beta or rc build comes out, another round of testing and possible rewriting until final release so as to make the earliest migrators who have bought the devices happy.
Meanwhile, don't manufacturers use new releases of Windows to push people towards buying new devices? In any case, for the money spent, not one dollar of revenue will be realized until someone buys that device new for their Win7 upgrade or OEM purchase. And device makers should spend this money now to be ready on Win7 D-Day-1 without return so Microsoft looks good?
In order to be somewhat constructive, I invite you to complete the following thoughts: (1) Money talks... and (2) Were Redmond to pay device makers for pre-release writing and testing...
Yes, this decade has been about TCDGADA (The customers do give a damn about:). First networking inflexibility, then security, then interface, then performance. Now if we can hold their feet to the fire about crippleware (five editions, only one with the all the features that matter), file formats, and equitable interoperability, Windows might become a product we work with instead of around.
Demonstrating interface is tricky especially as the particulars change. Maybe as the students think about how to stop a bicycle and a car?
As to algorithm and execution, get a cook book page and show how a recipe relates to a program. How the instructions declare the variables and provide the algorithm. (How the recipe consists of steps in an interpreted language in that when it says "caramelize the onions" the experienced chef knows what to physically do.) How the kitchen is the computer; the chef is the I/O bus; the range, oven and mixers are processors; the mixing bowls and counters are RAM; and the refrigerator and pantry are persisted memory while the grocery is costly slow memory. If the receipe said a tablespoon of salt when it meant teaspoon, that would be a type of programing bug. It wouldn't hurt, at that point, to mention Dr. Knuth who provided us with the algorithm = recipe connection.
What constitutes music geek bona fides? I know my way around guitars, keyboards, and the clarinet, I've written songs, recorded, and played out. While the names C# and F# are musical puns I think the C does double duty as an allusion to, well, C and C++, and I think the F refers to functional, which is why, I guess, the .net hooked in OCaml fork got that musical note. Maybe D# will be the name of the declarative .net language. Build it around mozart and there some real musical punnerage.
F for functional.
Though here, C# is to java as F# is to OCaml, and one wonders if the selection of OCaml as the syntactic base had to do with merits or license. As to Hjelsberg, who is legitimately a language superstar, I've been reading suggestions that some of the major elements of .net 2 and greater were necessitated by the desire to get a functional language into the .net universe and the F# developers did the major work in extending the platform. C# is now tilting towards functional. Though as I have been reading up on how to use scala (java meets functional) I'm coming to a point of view that bolting functional paradigms to an existing C-esque language means a lot of developers for a decade will be writing imperativonal code as the familiar syntax lulls one into using the familiar imperative techniques.
A radio station's FCC license limits the licensee to a particular frequency and power rating. The power rating is limited so as to allow multiple transmitters to use the same frequency. For FM signals, height above average terrain is also considered and the higher the transmitter, the lower the allowed power. On the AM band, most stations are required, in recognition of the way the AM signal travels better at night, to lower power at sunset and raise power at sunrise. FCC rules say a transmitter has to operate at near its licensed power and it is a fineable offense to broadcast too far below and too far above what is allowed.
No offense, but Mr. Laporte was going to spend that time talking about something. Did Mr. Laporte think better of Microsoft after the ads?
First point to consider: if one is posting at slashdot, one knows too much to be the target audience for the campaign. It doesn't matter if we are talking about the ad because we have too much invested with regards to the reasons we like or dislike Microsoft and its products.
Second point to consider (and if I were a stockholder in Microsoft, I'd be adding this to the list of other money-wasting ideas) is that Microsoft earlier this year apparently decided that they weren't liked enough. Most people run ad campaigns because they aren't profitable enough, but we've seen the financials. Now a likability campaign looks like the sort of stuff that the oil companies or Archer Daniels Midland run. Microsoft's campaign has the hint of committee build, because it seems to be about likability at some times, seems to be about telling the world that Vista is good at other moments, and wants to out-cool Apple at other times. Now if I were an ad agency and presented with those goals, the one I'd de-emphasize is the one related to Vista. Why? Because results are measured with dollars in the bank. The achievement of feel-good goals are tested via before and after surveys and negative results may be rationalized away as caused by external factors. ("Well, everyone was worried about the stock market that week...") The super-cool goal is validated when they are nominated for awards next year and by that time, if the trophies are not forthcoming, well, the client approved the spot, the awards are political, or the awards givers just didn't get it, and, any way, the checks have cleared.
Where can I get this Mojave I've seen advertised?
Which raises a question. The lowest end Wintel systems are less expensive than the personal Macs. I think that suggests Macs are more profitable as measured in dollars. So if the WGs succeed in harassing, I mean, educating the customers looking at Macs and turn $1200 sales into $400 sales, is Best Buy really going to be happy they let the Gates's Gurus onto the floor? Do the robot if you disagree. The funky chicken means you're on my page.
I'd ask this question: who owns the copyrights? I'd say it's the taxpayers .
Apparently people misunderstood my language: I think storage of waste is a serious and peculiar problem and should not be overlooked while positive arguments related to current costs and current environmental advantages are made and weighed. Since I've been watching this debate for thirty years, it seems to me that advocates have consistently understated costs and have overlooked liability limitations established by law. Water requirements for a plant tend to be ignored and out here in the West water has been a problem that isn't that far from becoming a crisis.
I wouldn't have mentioned anything but a story about a solar power facility in SLO is met quickly with a snarky comment about how a nuclear facility would have been smaller. And I'm the one overlooking salient points in the debate by mentioning waste? I repeat, there is a nuclear power plant in San Luis Obispo. I presume that when PG&E was siting it in the late 60s, early 70s, Diablo Canyon was the best location between San Francisco and Point Concepcion. SLO County has a lot of open land as well. As I further think about it, the argument for nuclear power is not diminished by putting other generating sources on line.
And we wave away the pesky protection and isolation of waste while it cools for a time longer than our history of recognizable civilization. San Luis Obispo already has a nuclear power plant, by the way.