Not the same. It blinks only once. I decent indicator will flash discretely in perpetuity. So that I can glance at it from afar, even coming in an hour later, to see if I need to pick up or touch the phone.
You haven't worked much in big business, have you?
I've known people who have been threatened legal action for giving bad references ("you cost me the job!"). I've known people who have been threatened legal action for good references ("you said this person was going to be good!"). Amusingly, I know one person who's gotten both (the founder of a 20ish-person shop)
There's a reason lots (most?) big company nowadays makes it official HR policy to only confirm salary and dates of employment. Said founder, above, also never gives out references.
If getting a statement like that raises questions for you, it raises questions for me whether you're experienced enough to be a good hiring manager.
Keep in mind that counting theory is relatively new and the addition into language reflects that. Many languages did not count past three (instead of two). Three is generally understood to be about the average maximum number you can tell just by "looking" at it, without having to quietly count it (save your bragging if you think you can do 4 or 5)
There are examples of this in English, still. The words describing items #1, 2, and 3 are distinctly different than the rest: first, second, and third rather than just appending a "th" on the end of the number like fourth, fifth, etc. We still put commas after every 3 digits in numbers.
What's more interesting is how thought shapes language, not vice-versa, IMO
<color>, <font> unnested <form> tags, <blink>?, everything frame related, the list goes on and on. Everything W3C never even came close to supporting... frames only because Netscape popularized them enough.
Are you smoking crack? Netscape tried rewriting standards every release after 2.0.
, , unnested tags, ?, everything frame related, the list goes on and on. Everything W3C never even came close to supporting... frames only because Netscape popularized them enough.
Are you smoking crack? Netscape tried rewriting standards every release after 2.0.
Why does it mean that just because a site is on the web it must provide all its services to the entire world? The web is worldwide, not the services of each specific site.
That's like complaining that the front page of the New York Times on the web isn't world-centric (hint: it's not even US-centric, it focuses on New York)
Likening this to getting rid of your database is very much like comparing the performance of mysql of old to Oracle, before mysql had transactions. (I don't know what the hit was that mysql took when xacts were added, but you should see what I'm generally getting at...) Point being it's a fast tool exactly because it's a lightweight tool.
This method looks good for storing large amounts of single-select equality queries. I didn't see anything while reading though about how to support range queries or aggregates. Let alone what happens when you need to be more expressive in your queries, like putting a join or two in there.
There are a lot of apps out there where this might work well (I saw Google mentioned above, and can think of things like weblogs, etc). Try doing something like an e-commerce site and you'll start to break down. Especially when you start adding "other people bought" (a-la Amazon), etc, or any other queries that are cross-references and generally require joins or other sorts of data-massaging functionality (i.e. databases' bread and butte)
To be pendantic Windows is the one who switched the order, on Apple. Apple has UI usability specs dictating the wording and placement of buttons, and Windows had to go and change it...
Not an MS bash as much as saying you wouldn't be complaining if you were a Mac user
unless someone could point me to some need to compile a compiler in it's native language
No need per se except that it proves a couple of points:
a) Your compiler is complete enough to compile an app as big as itself
b) Along the lines of (a), testing: the result of a compiler compiled by itself is called a 2nd generation compiler. If your new compiler (source) code has good code generation, your 2nd generation compiler should work faster than your 1st generation. Also if you have no bugs, your 3rd generation should be binary identical to your 2nd.
c) Proof of concept: your language is somewhat viable for a real application such as yourself (or as marketroids call it, eating your own dog food)
Predictions vs Futuristic Fantasy
on
The Coming Air Age
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I see many posts here about things like "2001" and other futuristic stories that now seem quaint, laughable, etc.
There's an important distinction between predicting the future and telling a story in the future. Movies such as 2001 just randomly pick a date that's "in the future" -- a time far enough away (from when it was made) that the viewer/reader can adequately suspend disbelief for the purposes of the story. Any date, really, will suffice.
You can laugh at people who make bona fide predictions that "X will happen by year Y". Those are people who actually believe such things.
But when taking in entertainment, always remember that Star Wars actually has the best blanket statement to suspend disbelief: that whole "In a galaxy far, far away" bit is nondescript but serves all purposes.
- Matt
Definition of spoofing
on
Wartrapping?
·
· Score: 1
No, spoofing is one of the oldest tricks in the book. I make *my* machine look like *their* machine, so whatever you do you're doing on *my* machine. Want to run ssh? Fine, you're running my ssh, which I've just happened to hack to catch all your keystrokes.
The easy case of spoofing was back in the TTY days. Just write a program that clears the screen and prints out a "login: " prompt. Trap the password the user enters, present a "invalid login" message, and bail (and exit the program to present a real login message in the meantime). You've now just trapped a password, and the user pretty much just figures the first login attempt was a typo.
Ever hired anybody? Ever sifted through a pile of even 10 just resumes a day, especially while you're trying to code something on your own?
Yes, you have 1" to catch my eye. You don't catch my eye with education (the piles are already sorted by BS, MS, etc) You don't catch my eye with experience; I want to know what you want to do, not what you did (you are, after all, hiring for the future, not the past). If you sound interesting, I'll read what you've done.
You ESPECIALLY don't catch my eye with a multi-page resume if you've worked any less than 10 years. This means you're a babbling idiot who can't summarize properly. This means you'll write lousy memos, ramble on at meetings, and aimless documentation (all of which I've seen, amazingly enough all with multi-page incoherent resumes). The memo part is key. People won't listen to you if you can't write a good memo.
Yes I have 10 years experience. Yes my resume is 1 page with a clear objective. Yes when my dot bomb went under I was somehow only out of work for roughly a week (admittedly after taking a month of voluntary vacation), fending off offers from both coasts, where everybody else is suffering.
Believe me, as somebody as part of a (former) web company whose potential client base fell into Radio Shack's domain, Radio Shack is extrememly technophobic. We found them to be one of the least receptive clients of all, and they flat-out admitted to being scared of the web.
Sounds ironic, but it isn't as much as you'd think. All their electronic parts are just plain-Jane caps and resistors, your basic 7400 logic gate IC's, etc. They built their entire consumer electronics market by just rebranding pre-existing Japanese components (back in the 60s and 70s when being Japanese was Bad instead of Good).
When it comes to leading revolutions, Radio Shack is actually a bit behind the curve.....
Really, this should come as no surprise. As previous posts pointed out, this has to do with *videos*, not the players themselves (yet).
The Blockbusters in my town (Madison, WI) are all going DVD, reorging their displays to relegate VHS to one corner (or in some stores, do some interleaving). And they've been doing this for the past 6-8 months.
And having grown up in Boston, everybody knows the midwest is slower to pick up on national trends.:) So if VHS is disappearing here, you know it's already gone on the coasts....
Though I doubt VCR sales will ever die until somebody comes out with a good (i.e. Joe Sixpack) way of TiVo'ing out to CDR.
They are "labels" (which, you said, they are only "basically" labels) only as an implementation detail made so C can be fast. Or, more to the point, could be made fast when compiler technology wasn't as good as it is today.
Case statements are all based on scalar values so switch statements could be collapsed more easily for optimized branch evaluation (lookup tables, alignment tricks for constant-value jumps, etc). Impossible to do with non-scalar values. Note, however, that languages can relax this (e.g. Pascal) with nice results for the programmer.
Don't take what was done as essentially a shortcut as gospel for makes sense semantically. It's like arguing there's a good point why the system call is "creat" and why "awk" is named like it is.
I've been told AT&T's crash was due to a missing "break" in a "case" statement.
To this day, I don't know why C made passing the default and having to enter "break", rather than adding a "pass" keyword and making break be the default. And of course Java had to follow suit, resulting in a lineage of similar bugs....
While this statement may (sadly) ring a little true, it is also a testiment to one of IBM's greatest strengths: it remains committed to supporting its product line. When IBM says they're going to support something, they mean it, and they'll stick it out to the bitter end. How long did they support the RS/6000 well beyond its useful limit? There's also reason why so many systems refuse to switch from MVS.
It's good to have somebody this loyal on Linux's side.
OS/2 was killed by IBM
on
Lindows Reviewed
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Unfortunately, you need to go back in time to understand why OS/2 was doomed from the beginning. And it was just as much to do with IBM (even more so) than MS.
Jerry Pournelle wrote an excellent article circa 1997 for Byte about how badly IBM dropped the ball on OS/2. Of the interesting highlights:
IBM drastically underestimated demand for OS/2 2.0 when it first came out. They didn't make nearly enough diskettes, and there were many stories of Eggheads (and other stores) running out of copies. I can attest to this, I couldn't get a copy when it first came out, either
Comdex, 1991: IBM was charging an OUTRAGEOUS price for their SDK (on the order of $150-$200). MS was handing SDKs for Win3.0 out to anybody who walked by.
Comdex, 1991: IBM OS/2 2.0 won best-of-show against Win3.0. Jerry recounts having to wait HALF AN HOUR at the awards show while they hunted down an IBM rep to even accept the award. All the while, the runner-up (Microsoft) was swarming with reps, all asking questions as to why they didn't win, handing out more SDKs, etc
There was even the time I called IBM tech support and got literally laughed at by the tech support for trying to run OS/2 on a 386/40 (recommended was a 386/33 at the time). 486/50s were bleeding edge at the time.
When OS/2 2.0 came out, only Win3.0 came out. IBM dropped OS/2 big time. By the time OS/2 2.1 came out, Win3.11 was well on its way and nobody gave two wits about OS/2 any more.
Finally, keep in mind that OS/2 1.x was the laughing stock of OSes at the time. Even more so than Win386, Win2.0, etc. The DOS box was nicely referred to as the "penalty box" for how miserably it performed.
Say what you want about Microsoft (I don't like them either). They know how to market their wares. And when you bumble as badly as IBM did, you have no chance.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd argue this is one of the best questions you could possibly ask a to-be programmer.
"Here's some contrived, shitty code that some jackass wrote, without comments, before leaving. What on earth does it do?"
Obligatory xkcd: http://xkcd.com/538/
Whoosh!
You're Welcome.
Thanks For Understanding My Problem
Not the same. It only blinks once. Meaning you have to see it when it comes in.
A decent indicator means you can wander in, say, oh, and hour later, and see it.
You haven't worked much in big business, have you?
I've known people who have been threatened legal action for giving bad references ("you cost me the job!"). I've known people who have been threatened legal action for good references ("you said this person was going to be good!"). Amusingly, I know one person who's gotten both (the founder of a 20ish-person shop)
There's a reason lots (most?) big company nowadays makes it official HR policy to only confirm salary and dates of employment. Said founder, above, also never gives out references.
If getting a statement like that raises questions for you, it raises questions for me whether you're experienced enough to be a good hiring manager.
Keep in mind that counting theory is relatively new and the addition into language reflects that. Many languages did not count past three (instead of two). Three is generally understood to be about the average maximum number you can tell just by "looking" at it, without having to quietly count it (save your bragging if you think you can do 4 or 5)
There are examples of this in English, still. The words describing items #1, 2, and 3 are distinctly different than the rest: first, second, and third rather than just appending a "th" on the end of the number like fourth, fifth, etc. We still put commas after every 3 digits in numbers.
What's more interesting is how thought shapes language, not vice-versa, IMO
Try that again...
<color>, <font> unnested <form> tags, <blink>?, everything frame related, the list goes on and on. Everything W3C never even came close to supporting... frames only because Netscape popularized them enough.
Are you smoking crack? Netscape tried rewriting standards every release after 2.0.
, , unnested tags, ?, everything frame related, the list goes on and on. Everything W3C never even came close to supporting... frames only because Netscape popularized them enough.
Are you smoking crack? Netscape tried rewriting standards every release after 2.0.
Why does it mean that just because a site is on the web it must provide all its services to the entire world? The web is worldwide, not the services of each specific site.
That's like complaining that the front page of the New York Times on the web isn't world-centric (hint: it's not even US-centric, it focuses on New York)
The idea of originally calling them "bugs" because of an actual insect is incorrect.
l
People have been using the word "bug" long before computers to describe anomolies in system behavior. See http://www.cbc.ca/news/indepth/words/bugaboos.htm
The fact that somebody actually found a real bug sometime later on was kind of ironic, so that story is what people remember...
This method looks good for storing large amounts of single-select equality queries. I didn't see anything while reading though about how to support range queries or aggregates. Let alone what happens when you need to be more expressive in your queries, like putting a join or two in there.
There are a lot of apps out there where this might work well (I saw Google mentioned above, and can think of things like weblogs, etc). Try doing something like an e-commerce site and you'll start to break down. Especially when you start adding "other people bought" (a-la Amazon), etc, or any other queries that are cross-references and generally require joins or other sorts of data-massaging functionality (i.e. databases' bread and butte)
To be pendantic Windows is the one who switched the order, on Apple. Apple has UI usability specs dictating the wording and placement of buttons, and Windows had to go and change it...
Not an MS bash as much as saying you wouldn't be complaining if you were a Mac user
unless someone could point me to some need to compile a compiler in it's native language
No need per se except that it proves a couple of points:
a) Your compiler is complete enough to compile an app as big as itself
b) Along the lines of (a), testing: the result of a compiler compiled by itself is called a 2nd generation compiler. If your new compiler (source) code has good code generation, your 2nd generation compiler should work faster than your 1st generation. Also if you have no bugs, your 3rd generation should be binary identical to your 2nd.
c) Proof of concept: your language is somewhat viable for a real application such as yourself (or as marketroids call it, eating your own dog food)
I see many posts here about things like "2001" and other futuristic stories that now seem quaint, laughable, etc.
There's an important distinction between predicting the future and telling a story in the future. Movies such as 2001 just randomly pick a date that's "in the future" -- a time far enough away (from when it was made) that the viewer/reader can adequately suspend disbelief for the purposes of the story. Any date, really, will suffice.
You can laugh at people who make bona fide predictions that "X will happen by year Y". Those are people who actually believe such things.
But when taking in entertainment, always remember that Star Wars actually has the best blanket statement to suspend disbelief: that whole "In a galaxy far, far away" bit is nondescript but serves all purposes.
- Matt
No, spoofing is one of the oldest tricks in the book. I make *my* machine look like *their* machine, so whatever you do you're doing on *my* machine. Want to run ssh? Fine, you're running my ssh, which I've just happened to hack to catch all your keystrokes.
The easy case of spoofing was back in the TTY days. Just write a program that clears the screen and prints out a "login: " prompt. Trap the password the user enters, present a "invalid login" message, and bail (and exit the program to present a real login message in the meantime). You've now just trapped a password, and the user pretty much just figures the first login attempt was a typo.
- Matt
Ever hired anybody? Ever sifted through a pile of even 10 just resumes a day, especially while you're trying to code something on your own?
Yes, you have 1" to catch my eye. You don't catch my eye with education (the piles are already sorted by BS, MS, etc) You don't catch my eye with experience; I want to know what you want to do, not what you did (you are, after all, hiring for the future, not the past). If you sound interesting, I'll read what you've done.
You ESPECIALLY don't catch my eye with a multi-page resume if you've worked any less than 10 years. This means you're a babbling idiot who can't summarize properly. This means you'll write lousy memos, ramble on at meetings, and aimless documentation (all of which I've seen, amazingly enough all with multi-page incoherent resumes). The memo part is key. People won't listen to you if you can't write a good memo.
Yes I have 10 years experience. Yes my resume is 1 page with a clear objective. Yes when my dot bomb went under I was somehow only out of work for roughly a week (admittedly after taking a month of voluntary vacation), fending off offers from both coasts, where everybody else is suffering.
Coincidence?
- Matt
Believe me, as somebody as part of a (former) web company whose potential client base fell into Radio Shack's domain, Radio Shack is extrememly technophobic. We found them to be one of the least receptive clients of all, and they flat-out admitted to being scared of the web.
Sounds ironic, but it isn't as much as you'd think. All their electronic parts are just plain-Jane caps and resistors, your basic 7400 logic gate IC's, etc. They built their entire consumer electronics market by just rebranding pre-existing Japanese components (back in the 60s and 70s when being Japanese was Bad instead of Good).
When it comes to leading revolutions, Radio Shack is actually a bit behind the curve.....
Really, this should come as no surprise. As previous posts pointed out, this has to do with *videos*, not the players themselves (yet).
:) So if VHS is disappearing here, you know it's already gone on the coasts....
The Blockbusters in my town (Madison, WI) are all going DVD, reorging their displays to relegate VHS to one corner (or in some stores, do some interleaving). And they've been doing this for the past 6-8 months.
And having grown up in Boston, everybody knows the midwest is slower to pick up on national trends.
Though I doubt VCR sales will ever die until somebody comes out with a good (i.e. Joe Sixpack) way of TiVo'ing out to CDR.
- Matt
The Onion's editor was on Conan and talked about how the London Times quoted the Onion article "DEA Chief: Winners Occasionally use drugs"
- Matt
They are "labels" (which, you said, they are only "basically" labels) only as an implementation detail made so C can be fast. Or, more to the point, could be made fast when compiler technology wasn't as good as it is today.
Case statements are all based on scalar values so switch statements could be collapsed more easily for optimized branch evaluation (lookup tables, alignment tricks for constant-value jumps, etc). Impossible to do with non-scalar values. Note, however, that languages can relax this (e.g. Pascal) with nice results for the programmer.
Don't take what was done as essentially a shortcut as gospel for makes sense semantically. It's like arguing there's a good point why the system call is "creat" and why "awk" is named like it is.
Easy:
Take a language (C, C++, Java, etc)
remove "break" statement from said language
add "pass" statement to said language
leave the rest alone
And learn how to chill out
I've been told AT&T's crash was due to a missing "break" in a "case" statement.
To this day, I don't know why C made passing the default and having to enter "break", rather than adding a "pass" keyword and making break be the default. And of course Java had to follow suit, resulting in a lineage of similar bugs....
While this statement may (sadly) ring a little true, it is also a testiment to one of IBM's greatest strengths: it remains committed to supporting its product line. When IBM says they're going to support something, they mean it, and they'll stick it out to the bitter end. How long did they support the RS/6000 well beyond its useful limit? There's also reason why so many systems refuse to switch from MVS.
It's good to have somebody this loyal on Linux's side.
Jerry Pournelle wrote an excellent article circa 1997 for Byte about how badly IBM dropped the ball on OS/2. Of the interesting highlights:
- IBM drastically underestimated demand for OS/2 2.0 when it first came out. They didn't make nearly enough diskettes, and there were many stories of Eggheads (and other stores) running out of copies. I can attest to this, I couldn't get a copy when it first came out, either
- Comdex, 1991: IBM was charging an OUTRAGEOUS price for their SDK (on the order of $150-$200). MS was handing SDKs for Win3.0 out to anybody who walked by.
- Comdex, 1991: IBM OS/2 2.0 won best-of-show against Win3.0. Jerry recounts having to wait HALF AN HOUR at the awards show while they hunted down an IBM rep to even accept the award. All the while, the runner-up (Microsoft) was swarming with reps, all asking questions as to why they didn't win, handing out more SDKs, etc
There was even the time I called IBM tech support and got literally laughed at by the tech support for trying to run OS/2 on a 386/40 (recommended was a 386/33 at the time). 486/50s were bleeding edge at the time.When OS/2 2.0 came out, only Win3.0 came out. IBM dropped OS/2 big time. By the time OS/2 2.1 came out, Win3.11 was well on its way and nobody gave two wits about OS/2 any more.
Finally, keep in mind that OS/2 1.x was the laughing stock of OSes at the time. Even more so than Win386, Win2.0, etc. The DOS box was nicely referred to as the "penalty box" for how miserably it performed.
Say what you want about Microsoft (I don't like them either). They know how to market their wares. And when you bumble as badly as IBM did, you have no chance.