Nah, that's nonsense. Python has string objects, Scheme has continuations. Ruby's still slower.
First-class reentrant continuations and dynamic typing (another major efficiency hog) probably constrain you to, in the best case, the same box as compiled Scheme - about the same as Java.
If you looked at the shootout you'd see what was wrong in Ruby: it's just about the slowest serious scripting language. It seems to be using pure bloody-minded interpretation without any bytecode or JIT stage.
Nothing wrong with the language that a proper implementation couldn't cure, basically.
I have no love for the state but I don't agree with your plan. Not that it wouldn't be nice, but that it can't work and it's the wrong approach path. Yes if they squeeze, more people will slip through their fingers. But that just results in a "white" and "black" market - it's actually not much of an improvement. The black market may be technically free but it behaves much like a coerced market. You end up paying tax to the mafia instead, and people learn to hate anarchy. It's a variant of the old "worse is better", "misrule provokes revolution" idea, and it's mistaken. Worse is worse. Misrule provokes a revolution that ususally leads right back to misrule.
It's actually always better to make the state smaller, kinder, freer. Improvements that way are self reinforcing. People see the better quality of life and aspire to keep it. They build up a culture and institutions of self reliance. They learn to enjoy freedom. If anything that's really a more anarchic attitude; hating the state isn't the point. The state is an intrusion, and it will eventually go away. Focusing on it too much just feeds it.
It's as much an innovation as the mouse (versus cursor keys, joysticks, paddles, or whatever they had back in the day). New input can make techniques possible that were theorizable but uselessly clunky with older input.
The main problem of net neutrality is that it would stop efficiency improvements. Example: a vast percentage of modern internet traffic is BitTorrent. What if ISPs collaborated to shunt that all onto a dedicated high speed network and take the pressure off the regular wires? Some packets are being treated unequally, but everyone's speed goes up. Net neutrality would ban that.
(Yes I know the current trend is the other way, to shunt P2P into a crawler lane - IMO they'll learn that's wrong-headed when increasingly sophisticated circumvention makes their efforts fail. The way to get problem traffic out of the way is to entice it to play "good citizen" in exchange for faster speeds, like building a multi-lane bypass around an old town with narrow streets.)
It strikes me that the asymptote of this curve is "spammers" generating actual new, useful, interesting content to push their spam. In other words, the acme of un-blockable spam sites is an ad-supported nonspam site.
M$, Google and friends might actually drag them so far around illegitimacy they come back to legitimacy. Ironic, no?
That's like saying: with the number of grungy, smelly, biting, incontinent, diseased, phobic, loud and untrainable dogs in the pound, it's a wonder puppies havn't been outlawed.
It wouldn't be a clone, it would be a parthenogenetic daughter. The genes would still munge and scramble in the meiosis phase prior to budding off sperms and eggs. Result: a new child all of whose genes originate from the mother, but some doubled, some missing, and in a different order.
It would be sort of like the ultimate incest and have all the problems thereof, but not a clone.
The core problem of spelling reform is that English spelling is not random. It's a code that has a dual purpose - as a phonetic reminder (not a purely phonetic encoding) and as an etymological hint. English words carry data on their origins and hints as to their meaning, very much like the Chinese system of Hanzi, such that a word can be at least partially guessed. A lot of that is in the spelling, rather than the sound. (Also, again like Chinese, regional pronunciation can vary, while the spelling stays constant.)
In believe that the richness of multi-contextual information in English spelling brings it closer to the way the words are conceived and stored mentally than any pure phonetic rendering. Have you ever read prose presented in a dense, spelled out accent? You have to "sound it out" to understand it, and some words may evade parsing until you finally guess them some minutes later. You can't anymore just scan with the eye, and read as fast as you can see.
Totally agreed that libertarianism doesn't mean there are no cultural rules. In fact it means a greatly amplified ability to discriminate.
Wal-mart could impose terms (faced always by the counter-pressure of competition), but government would let drugs alone. The FDA, if a rump of such remained, would limit itself to requiring honest ingredient labels.
You know, it's nice that posts like this one shake assholes like you out of the woodwork, to defend evil on grounds of cultural relativism or unearned government sovereignty. I know who to set as a "foe". You get a nice little red dot from me, and I hope the next time you fire up Slashdot, every single post has a little amber dot just for you.
No, it's quite in keeping with Heinlein's stories. Have you read "the man who sold the moon"? The hero in that wasn't the engineer who built the rocket, but the guy who moved heaven and earth so the rocket would get built - by funding and organizing the project.
At a guess, they want a guy with a camera aiming and making the fire/no fire decision like in a predator drone, and they'd also prefer not to junk the engine and airframe everytime they hit a target (because that's what a cruise missile is, a little aircraft that crashes).
Be had an easy target - a one-user no-security OS written from scratch in a single implementation language with zero legacy anything, and no particularly harsh IO or uptime demands.
Nowadays children have negative civil rights. They have the right to demand to be oppressed. Other people's civil rights get taken away to keep children "protected". It's fricken' ridiculous. The world they live in is so much worse than a police state it's crazy. They're herded, imprisoned, propertyless, practically property themselves. Every man's hand is against them. If I were a kid I'd look on digital technology as the last small bastion of genuine personal liberty, and I'd be thinking seriously about organizing an armed revolt.
If the "elephants" are close together, the obvious answer is to aim to make the simplest thing that could possibly work. Example: "web services". They're a cluster of awkward hacks held together with baling wire, but they're comprehensible in 30 minutes from a standing start, and they reuse a ton of mature APIs with readily available prepackaged implementations. Web services are the answer to "what can we have built, tested, up and deployed by next Wednesday?" Naturally they won.
Centralized DB in even the MySQL style is serious overkill and overcomplication, for casual or local very-denormalized data listings such as constitute a the majority of small-business databases. Access would be good if it were cheap and you could trust it. Excel is a common ugly hack.
Slashdot Mirror
Nah, that's nonsense. Python has string objects, Scheme has continuations. Ruby's still slower.
First-class reentrant continuations and dynamic typing (another major efficiency hog) probably constrain you to, in the best case, the same box as compiled Scheme - about the same as Java.
If you looked at the shootout you'd see what was wrong in Ruby: it's just about the slowest serious scripting language. It seems to be using pure bloody-minded interpretation without any bytecode or JIT stage.
Nothing wrong with the language that a proper implementation couldn't cure, basically.
I have no love for the state but I don't agree with your plan. Not that it wouldn't be nice, but that it can't work and it's the wrong approach path. Yes if they squeeze, more people will slip through their fingers. But that just results in a "white" and "black" market - it's actually not much of an improvement. The black market may be technically free but it behaves much like a coerced market. You end up paying tax to the mafia instead, and people learn to hate anarchy. It's a variant of the old "worse is better", "misrule provokes revolution" idea, and it's mistaken. Worse is worse. Misrule provokes a revolution that ususally leads right back to misrule.
It's actually always better to make the state smaller, kinder, freer. Improvements that way are self reinforcing. People see the better quality of life and aspire to keep it. They build up a culture and institutions of self reliance. They learn to enjoy freedom. If anything that's really a more anarchic attitude; hating the state isn't the point. The state is an intrusion, and it will eventually go away. Focusing on it too much just feeds it.
It's as much an innovation as the mouse (versus cursor keys, joysticks, paddles, or whatever they had back in the day). New input can make techniques possible that were theorizable but uselessly clunky with older input.
The main problem of net neutrality is that it would stop efficiency improvements. Example: a vast percentage of modern internet traffic is BitTorrent. What if ISPs collaborated to shunt that all onto a dedicated high speed network and take the pressure off the regular wires? Some packets are being treated unequally, but everyone's speed goes up. Net neutrality would ban that.
(Yes I know the current trend is the other way, to shunt P2P into a crawler lane - IMO they'll learn that's wrong-headed when increasingly sophisticated circumvention makes their efforts fail. The way to get problem traffic out of the way is to entice it to play "good citizen" in exchange for faster speeds, like building a multi-lane bypass around an old town with narrow streets.)
It strikes me that the asymptote of this curve is "spammers" generating actual new, useful, interesting content to push their spam. In other words, the acme of un-blockable spam sites is an ad-supported nonspam site.
M$, Google and friends might actually drag them so far around illegitimacy they come back to legitimacy. Ironic, no?
That's like saying: with the number of grungy, smelly, biting, incontinent, diseased, phobic, loud and untrainable dogs in the pound, it's a wonder puppies havn't been outlawed.
It wouldn't be a clone, it would be a parthenogenetic daughter. The genes would still munge and scramble in the meiosis phase prior to budding off sperms and eggs. Result: a new child all of whose genes originate from the mother, but some doubled, some missing, and in a different order.
It would be sort of like the ultimate incest and have all the problems thereof, but not a clone.
...unschooling is bail.
Google "Teenage Liberation Handbook" for a key.
The core problem of spelling reform is that English spelling is not random. It's a code that has a dual purpose - as a phonetic reminder (not a purely phonetic encoding) and as an etymological hint. English words carry data on their origins and hints as to their meaning, very much like the Chinese system of Hanzi, such that a word can be at least partially guessed. A lot of that is in the spelling, rather than the sound. (Also, again like Chinese, regional pronunciation can vary, while the spelling stays constant.)
In believe that the richness of multi-contextual information in English spelling brings it closer to the way the words are conceived and stored mentally than any pure phonetic rendering. Have you ever read prose presented in a dense, spelled out accent? You have to "sound it out" to understand it, and some words may evade parsing until you finally guess them some minutes later. You can't anymore just scan with the eye, and read as fast as you can see.
Surely this makes them easier to clear? Find one, blow it up, others reveal themselves by moving, blow them up, and so on.
...is surely what BitTorrent is all about avoiding. If they need to beef up, they're doing something wrong.
Probably the thing they're doing wrong is kissing RIAA butt. Generalising: forced monopolies demand centralization, and hence scale horribly.
Totally agreed that libertarianism doesn't mean there are no cultural rules. In fact it means a greatly amplified ability to discriminate.
Wal-mart could impose terms (faced always by the counter-pressure of competition), but government would let drugs alone. The FDA, if a rump of such remained, would limit itself to requiring honest ingredient labels.
"I am a Libertarian [...] the government should regulate the HELL out of them"
No sir, you are NOT a libertarian. A libertarian would want heroin to be available from your local Wal-mart on the same terms as table salt.
You know, it's nice that posts like this one shake assholes like you out of the woodwork, to defend evil on grounds of cultural relativism or unearned government sovereignty. I know who to set as a "foe". You get a nice little red dot from me, and I hope the next time you fire up Slashdot, every single post has a little amber dot just for you.
No, it's quite in keeping with Heinlein's stories. Have you read "the man who sold the moon"? The hero in that wasn't the engineer who built the rocket, but the guy who moved heaven and earth so the rocket would get built - by funding and organizing the project.
...as a read-writable computer medium. Nobody's going to complain about being able to burn more data to a disk.
It will make no significant inroads as a ROM medium in any flavour. It may even damage PS3, as if they had picked Betamax.
At a guess, they want a guy with a camera aiming and making the fire/no fire decision like in a predator drone, and they'd also prefer not to junk the engine and airframe everytime they hit a target (because that's what a cruise missile is, a little aircraft that crashes).
Be had an easy target - a one-user no-security OS written from scratch in a single implementation language with zero legacy anything, and no particularly harsh IO or uptime demands.
Nowadays children have negative civil rights. They have the right to demand to be oppressed. Other people's civil rights get taken away to keep children "protected". It's fricken' ridiculous. The world they live in is so much worse than a police state it's crazy. They're herded, imprisoned, propertyless, practically property themselves. Every man's hand is against them. If I were a kid I'd look on digital technology as the last small bastion of genuine personal liberty, and I'd be thinking seriously about organizing an armed revolt.
Their warrant canary is sheer genius. I love these guys!
Gun control: flintlock muzzle-loading pistols and cutlasses for all.
Pre-emptive war: Arrr! Loot 'em and send 'em to Davy Jones!
Abortion: tis the wench's problem and none o' mine, I be four ports away by then.
Healthcare: get the FDA to declare rum an anaesthetic.
If the "elephants" are close together, the obvious answer is to aim to make the simplest thing that could possibly work. Example: "web services". They're a cluster of awkward hacks held together with baling wire, but they're comprehensible in 30 minutes from a standing start, and they reuse a ton of mature APIs with readily available prepackaged implementations. Web services are the answer to "what can we have built, tested, up and deployed by next Wednesday?" Naturally they won.
Surely the obvious answer is to build in a real jet? The extra mass of metal from the turbine etc would drag the CG down again.
Centralized DB in even the MySQL style is serious overkill and overcomplication, for casual or local very-denormalized data listings such as constitute a the majority of small-business databases. Access would be good if it were cheap and you could trust it. Excel is a common ugly hack.
Perhaps there's some GUI tool based on SQLite?