"All the luxuries we have today, the modern conveniences, are a result of the science research that went on in the '60s during the space race"
Either someebody needs hit that person with a cluebat, or someone completely arbitrarily defined 'modern'.
A lot of research (nuclear technology, for instance) was done because of WW I and II. Also, the industrial revolution played a key role in introducing modern conveniences enjoyed by the average family nowadays (cars, washing machines, etc). It is also easy to overlook electricity, vaccination against disease and clean drinking water, and pretend they are not modern conveniences- even though a lot of people have not yet had the privilege to gain access to them.
The truth is that in the end it is still a choice between MS and MS.
The same happens with detergents- that's why Unilever and Proctor&Gamble produce a multitude of detergents. If a sufficiently large group of people have a choice between 3 detergents of the same price & quality, and 2 are Unilever, it is likely that around 2/3 of the sold detergent will be Unilever.
In this case, anything non-MS was out of the picture, so why would they complain?
The only exception are trajectory control systems, which monitor the average speed over a stretch of road. For this purpose the license plate is recorded on entry and exit of the monitored stretch. I'm not certain whether this information is actually stored. It is stored, even if you do not surpass speed limits. My mother got a letter at some point asking if she would participate in a survey 'because she regularly travels the A13'. This is outrageous- if I am not a criminal, why am I tracked like one? This information should be discarded as soon as it is clear that I didn't break the law, *or else* it is only going to be abused for other purposes (and it is- which is shown by the survey).
...computers read aloud typed and handwritten commands. The software will allow people who can't read to interact with a PC They'll still need to be able to write, though. Of course this has its uses for the visually impaired.
Ignorant as I am, I'd say all they need to do is to just up the frequency until outside TV spectrum. As an added bonus, all you'd have to do to cook your food would be to place it near your wireless router.
"making it a nightmare to [...] mathematically prove [...]"
Intriguingly, "mathematical proof" is always used as an argument against goto, but never against other flow control constructs such as while loops or break in a switch/case statements.
Semantically,
function a(b) {
if (b==null) goto endfunc;
do_something(); endfunc: }
and
function a(b) {
if (b!=null) {
do_something();
} }
are entirely equal. So why would one be harder to prove than the other?
Over time we have seen new flow control statements being introduced. One of the more recent additions is try/catch/finally. It doesn't seem far-fetched to me that some acceptable uses of goto simply haven't been captured in flow control statements yet.
Then for something besides the point- in the real world, I have yet to run into the first coder that uses the 'Mathematical proof' argument *and* actually mathematically proofs his code. Could it be that you are the exception to that rule?
It seems J&J began using the trademark in 1887, 6 years after the Red Cross was formed, but 13 years before the charitable organization was chartered by Congress.
Oh my. Look- they've been abusing our trademark for over a century. Hey- that's unfair! The bastards! There is only so much abuse we can take! This abuse has got to stop NOW! SUE THEM!
This will work wonderfully because the HTML standard was designed from the ground up with graceful degradation in mind.
Even if browsers do not support these tags, the content of the tags will be displayed- if you don't want this, simply comment them out like so:
<newtag><!-- some stuff --></newtag>.
For tags that do not want their content displayed, there usually is an accompanying 'no' tag:
<script><!-- script goes here --></script> <noscript>Your browser does not support scripts.</noscript>
With these new tags, browsers may not display a page any differently- instead of
<div class="article">articletext</div> and a stylesheet saying.article { font-family: serif; }
now you get
<article>articletext</article> and a stylesheet saying article { font-family: serif; }
This will *already* be rendered equally in both old and new browsers. Some of these may end up having a fancier display in new browsers; I imagine dates could have a date picker style pop-up to better visualize the 'when'.
Even if some extensions seem to have limited use from a front-end rendering perspective, this can have a huge impact on search engines, for example, which is great. Although I must admit that I have second thoughts on some of the tags that seem to require JavaScript.
FTA: "The force is due to neither electrical charge or gravity, for example, but the fluctuations in all-pervasive energy fields in the intervening empty space between the objects and is one reason atoms stick together, also explaining a "dry glue" effect that enables a gecko to walk across a ceiling."... and now that scientists have figured out how to reverse the Casimir effect, this will soon enable geckos to walk on the floor.
The (somewhat rhetorical) question is, did they raid those homes to find *one* mod chip or whole bunches of them? You don't need to have hundreds of mod chips to play back your own backups, after all. Unless, of course, said mod chip owners want to claim those mod chips were all backups of their *original* mod chip...
...exactly how would a human *know* if a mouse is schizophrenic? Simple. If it plays pool against itself, talks to invisible friends and hangs its cage full of clippings of newspapers and magazines and delivers an envelope full of them to a drop box once in a while, it's schizophrenic.
I'm not holding my breath Me neither. I recently switched from ATI (on which I spent several days to get it to work but *still* suboptimal) to NVidia to get accelerated dualscreen and it Just Works. Never looked back. Sorry ATI, you're too late.
more cell towers means less radiation, as both the towers and the cell phones can then reduce their transmission power. The net effect is null, however. The total amount of transmission power needed to cover any given area stays about the same. More towers means less radiation *per tower*, but on average you'll be nearer to one.
You don't need to know all 300 distros to make a good choice. It is pretty clear which distros are mainstream and which ones are not. If you are looking for a general-purpose replacement for general-purpose Windows, you can go with Ubuntu, Suse, Redhat, Debian or Mandriva. Almost only if you're "hardcore", you will dive into special-purpose distros such as business card/feather linux, freesco, etc. That is from a user perspective. From developers perspective there is such a thing as LSB.
"Where is the good stuff we can all learn from?" -- It is Very Rare. There are some best practices we can all agree on (comment your code, don't use globals, use descriptive variable names, etc). The best we can do is to try to adhere to these best practices. The point is to make our code readable to others.
But- if we are lone coders, there is not much point in making our private code readable to others. If we code in a team, there is a point, but there will always be team members that are less capable than others. There isn't always time to write code twice, so the suboptimal code will stick and infect the rest of the code base over time.
IMNSHO I'm capable of producing fairly clean code- I still find it can use some cleaning up before being released to the public (comments, function descriptions etc). But structurally the design of the code is solid. Still, some code I wrote over a decade ago has gotten a bit hard to read by now.
Sure, without doubt this is the cleanest code ever. But that doesn't automatically make it the most readable.
For one thing, properly commenting your code will help people understand it; it is one of the best practices that I picked up when coding almost exclusively in assembler for three years. It has lasted across programming languages.
Due to lack of documentation, the purpose of your snippet of code above is entirely unclear to me (other than it being obvious that the code is forever stuck doing something in an infinite loop) , and I'm not going to spend 10 minutes to try to read it, if 1 minute of your time documenting your code could have explained it perfectly.
delivers targeted advertising as 'part of the OS.' First of all, all macro/microkernel discussions aside, what business does targeted advertising have as part of any operating system? Second, I think it is ridiculous that people who *pay for* an operating system are still forced advertisements down their throat. I'll stick with my ad-free OS, thank you.
"A real AI might compress 'The sky is blue today' and decompress to 'Today it's beatiful weather' and not be wrong."
That might be a good example of acceptable *lossy* AI text compression. One step further and it will compress articles into a proper, readable summary.
Slashdot Mirror
"All the luxuries we have today, the modern conveniences, are a result of the science research that went on in the '60s during the space race"
Either someebody needs hit that person with a cluebat, or someone completely arbitrarily defined 'modern'.
A lot of research (nuclear technology, for instance) was done because of WW I and II. Also, the industrial revolution played a key role in introducing modern conveniences enjoyed by the average family nowadays (cars, washing machines, etc). It is also easy to overlook electricity, vaccination against disease and clean drinking water, and pretend they are not modern conveniences- even though a lot of people have not yet had the privilege to gain access to them.
The truth is that in the end it is still a choice between MS and MS.
The same happens with detergents- that's why Unilever and Proctor&Gamble produce a multitude of detergents. If a sufficiently large group of people have a choice between 3 detergents of the same price & quality, and 2 are Unilever, it is likely that around 2/3 of the sold detergent will be Unilever.
In this case, anything non-MS was out of the picture, so why would they complain?
The only exception are trajectory control systems, which monitor the average speed over a stretch of road. For this purpose the license plate is recorded on entry and exit of the monitored stretch. I'm not certain whether this information is actually stored. It is stored, even if you do not surpass speed limits. My mother got a letter at some point asking if she would participate in a survey 'because she regularly travels the A13'. This is outrageous- if I am not a criminal, why am I tracked like one? This information should be discarded as soon as it is clear that I didn't break the law, *or else* it is only going to be abused for other purposes (and it is- which is shown by the survey).
...computers read aloud typed and handwritten commands. The software will allow people who can't read to interact with a PC They'll still need to be able to write, though. Of course this has its uses for the visually impaired.
Hmm... dunno. Even with those words having the same meaning, somehow "What the intercourse are you talking about" doesn't have the same ring to it.
Ignorant as I am, I'd say all they need to do is to just up the frequency until outside TV spectrum. As an added bonus, all you'd have to do to cook your food would be to place it near your wireless router.
"making it a nightmare to [...] mathematically prove [...]"
Intriguingly, "mathematical proof" is always used as an argument against goto, but never against other flow control constructs such as while loops or break in a switch/case statements.
Semantically,
function a(b) {
if (b==null) goto endfunc;
do_something();
endfunc:
}
and
function a(b) {
if (b!=null) {
do_something();
}
}
are entirely equal. So why would one be harder to prove than the other?
Over time we have seen new flow control statements being introduced. One of the more recent additions is try/catch/finally. It doesn't seem far-fetched to me that some acceptable uses of goto simply haven't been captured in flow control statements yet.
Then for something besides the point- in the real world, I have yet to run into the first coder that uses the 'Mathematical proof' argument *and* actually mathematically proofs his code. Could it be that you are the exception to that rule?
Given any set of 25 viruses, each virus represents 4 percent. So one antivirus caught a virus and a half?
Sorry, I got a bit carried away. Got to think about my blood pressure. I feel much better now, thank you.
It seems J&J began using the trademark in 1887, 6 years after the Red Cross was formed, but 13 years before the charitable organization was chartered by Congress.
Oh my. Look- they've been abusing our trademark for over a century. Hey- that's unfair! The bastards! There is only so much abuse we can take! This abuse has got to stop NOW! SUE THEM!
This will work wonderfully because the HTML standard was designed from the ground up with graceful degradation in mind.
.article { font-family: serif; }
Even if browsers do not support these tags, the content of the tags will be displayed- if you don't want this, simply comment them out like so:
<newtag><!-- some stuff --></newtag>.
For tags that do not want their content displayed, there usually is an accompanying 'no' tag:
<script><!-- script goes here --></script>
<noscript>Your browser does not support scripts.</noscript>
With these new tags, browsers may not display a page any differently- instead of
<div class="article">articletext</div>
and a stylesheet saying
now you get
<article>articletext</article>
and a stylesheet saying
article { font-family: serif; }
This will *already* be rendered equally in both old and new browsers. Some of these may end up having a fancier display in new browsers; I imagine dates could have a date picker style pop-up to better visualize the 'when'.
Even if some extensions seem to have limited use from a front-end rendering perspective, this can have a huge impact on search engines, for example, which is great. Although I must admit that I have second thoughts on some of the tags that seem to require JavaScript.
FTA: "The force is due to neither electrical charge or gravity, for example, but the fluctuations in all-pervasive energy fields in the intervening empty space between the objects and is one reason atoms stick together, also explaining a "dry glue" effect that enables a gecko to walk across a ceiling." ... and now that scientists have figured out how to reverse the Casimir effect, this will soon enable geckos to walk on the floor.
The (somewhat rhetorical) question is, did they raid those homes to find *one* mod chip or whole bunches of them? You don't need to have hundreds of mod chips to play back your own backups, after all. Unless, of course, said mod chip owners want to claim those mod chips were all backups of their *original* mod chip...
More appropriately, Internet Killed the Video Star
...exactly how would a human *know* if a mouse is schizophrenic? Simple. If it plays pool against itself, talks to invisible friends and hangs its cage full of clippings of newspapers and magazines and delivers an envelope full of them to a drop box once in a while, it's schizophrenic.
I'm not holding my breath Me neither. I recently switched from ATI (on which I spent several days to get it to work but *still* suboptimal) to NVidia to get accelerated dualscreen and it Just Works. Never looked back. Sorry ATI, you're too late.
more cell towers means less radiation, as both the towers and the cell phones can then reduce their transmission power. The net effect is null, however. The total amount of transmission power needed to cover any given area stays about the same. More towers means less radiation *per tower*, but on average you'll be nearer to one.
Okay, here's the second one.
Maybe it affects its neighbo(u)rs.
You don't need to know all 300 distros to make a good choice. It is pretty clear which distros are mainstream and which ones are not. If you are looking for a general-purpose replacement for general-purpose Windows, you can go with Ubuntu, Suse, Redhat, Debian or Mandriva. Almost only if you're "hardcore", you will dive into special-purpose distros such as business card/feather linux, freesco, etc. That is from a user perspective. From developers perspective there is such a thing as LSB.
That would be London Bridge.
"Where is the good stuff we can all learn from?" -- It is Very Rare. There are some best practices we can all agree on (comment your code, don't use globals, use descriptive variable names, etc). The best we can do is to try to adhere to these best practices. The point is to make our code readable to others.
But- if we are lone coders, there is not much point in making our private code readable to others. If we code in a team, there is a point, but there will always be team members that are less capable than others. There isn't always time to write code twice, so the suboptimal code will stick and infect the rest of the code base over time.
IMNSHO I'm capable of producing fairly clean code- I still find it can use some cleaning up before being released to the public (comments, function descriptions etc). But structurally the design of the code is solid. Still, some code I wrote over a decade ago has gotten a bit hard to read by now.
Sure, without doubt this is the cleanest code ever.
But that doesn't automatically make it the most readable.
For one thing, properly commenting your code will help people understand it; it is one of the best practices that I picked up when coding almost exclusively in assembler for three years. It has lasted across programming languages.
Due to lack of documentation, the purpose of your snippet of code above is entirely unclear to me (other than it being obvious that the code is forever stuck doing something in an infinite loop) , and I'm not going to spend 10 minutes to try to read it, if 1 minute of your time documenting your code could have explained it perfectly.
delivers targeted advertising as 'part of the OS.' First of all, all macro/microkernel discussions aside, what business does targeted advertising have as part of any operating system? Second, I think it is ridiculous that people who *pay for* an operating system are still forced advertisements down their throat. I'll stick with my ad-free OS, thank you.
"A real AI might compress 'The sky is blue today' and decompress to 'Today it's beatiful weather' and not be wrong." That might be a good example of acceptable *lossy* AI text compression. One step further and it will compress articles into a proper, readable summary.