I've worked in the computer programming trade since 1965 when I learned COBOL '65 in the Air Force. This year, in semi-retirement, in an equally demanding role, I taught three classes of Java Programming in a local high school. I enjoy Java but I must admit a love for REXX.
I presented a paper on REXX at a REXX conference at Stanford University, May 1990. The topic of the paper was on the ease of portability between platforms. Subsequently to that, I working as a programmer at Bank of America's campus in Concord, CA, I trained all programmers there who wanted to stay late in how to program in REXX on MVS, VM, OS/2, DOS, and Windows platforms, the main differences being how I/O was handled.
The course I taught at BofA was about three hours long, an hour and 1/2 for two late afternoon sessions. So the learning curve was quite low.
In addition to teaching everything they needed to know, I also showed them how to code dynamic SQL statements in REXX code. I had already used REXX in a good bit of the code used for utilities and one-time jobs for the Cash Vault System that I was working on there.
There are few languages that one can learn completely in 3 hours. The Java classes (one AP and two general) took an entire high school year and I only scratched the surface even though I covered all 19 chapters of Cay Horstmann's "Java Essentials".
Those that turn their noses up at REXX I have found to be the same sort of people who think writing code is an IQ test and if they don't write code that no one else can maintain that they have somehow failed. I don't think programming has to be difficult and the best languages are those that are easy to learn and easy to program in while being able to get the job done and run efficiently. For quick and dirty code or seldom run utilities in production, REXX is an ideal language to use. Of course, for a program that is processing 10+ million records sequentially or updating a DB2 database for millions of transactions for real time access you want to use a compilable language.
Those that want spamming to continue always come up with ideas that have never been tried do not work. If we don't start stopping spam we will never stop spam. Plug the holes as we go.
Those that put all of their energies into reasons why we cannot stop spam are aiding the spammers. They need to put their energies in addressing and eliminating spam.
The truth is that most spam originates from a relatively small number of sources and all we have to do is shut them down one by one.
The problem is that I want a single thing to look for in the subject line that would allow my outlook Outlook Express 6 to toss them into the delete file without me having to update the message rules every few days.
I don't want to have to continually update the message rules with new subject lines they porn industry creatively comes up with (no pun intended).
Your complaint about Cingular's billing system may be legit but if ATT's is better why do you assume they would get rid of ATT's and not Cingular's?
I switched from Cingular to ATT because when I drove from California to Florida in 2001 there were few places along the way that had Cingular's service. With ATT phone towers and customers added to Cingular, they will probably become the wireless service with the largest and most access points without the "extended range" or other obnoxious status messages that mean more money.
I did like the memory chip in Cingular's phones which I had to give up when switching to ATT but perhaps I will regain that with this merger.
In the mean time I have an offer from ATT on my desk to get $50 credit on my bill if I sign up for a new annual service. Don't know if I would lose the ability of having the roll-over minutes that Cingualr has, a feature I look forward to as I don't use my phone that much.
A related problem is the advocation of voting on the internet or any other computerized version of voting that requires some identification.
The problem is that there are two mutually exclusive actions required for voting on the interent.
The first is a valid identification of the voter. Assuming that the voter can be identified, that means the computer would know who is voting.
The second is the annomity of the vote. Assuming a vote was made and the computer knows who voted, because of identification for validating the voter is a registered voter, it is now impossible to not know who voted in what way. A vote that is not annonymous is not a vote but a death warrent.
If you somehow separate the identification of the voter from the vote, then you have no way of knowing if the vote is by a valid voter or not.
The voters are screwed no matter what action they take.
Internet voting could be how we will lose democracy if the average person cannot understand what is at stake.
A scientific study was conducted to document the political affiliation of those that believe in Global Warming. It was determined that if you were a Democrat you were 80% more likely to believe in Global Warming than if you were a Republican.
Since scientific truth is, of course, determined by majority vote and the Democrats have stolen 18 more voting machines in Broward County, FL, to "fix" them for the November election (got to give them credit for trying again), it is obvious that the Democrats are causing Global Warming.
Assuming the post is true, they why do we see the light from galaxies over 10 billion light years away? Surely the "light horizon" would prevent that. And if light is bent 90 degrees, them that would only direct us to see them as being in "front" of us. But we would still see them. Seems to be something missing in the argument. Please explain what evidence exists for the "light horizon" from non black hole sources.
Interesting idea though. Needs some evidence.
Slashdot Mirror
I should have mentioned that I met the creator of REXX, Mike Cowlishaw, at the Stanford Univ. Conference in 1989. He was a thoroughly pleasant guy.
I've worked in the computer programming trade since 1965 when I learned COBOL '65 in the Air Force. This year, in semi-retirement, in an equally demanding role, I taught three classes of Java Programming in a local high school. I enjoy Java but I must admit a love for REXX.
I presented a paper on REXX at a REXX conference at Stanford University, May 1990. The topic of the paper was on the ease of portability between platforms. Subsequently to that, I working as a programmer at Bank of America's campus in Concord, CA, I trained all programmers there who wanted to stay late in how to program in REXX on MVS, VM, OS/2, DOS, and Windows platforms, the main differences being how I/O was handled.
The course I taught at BofA was about three hours long, an hour and 1/2 for two late afternoon sessions. So the learning curve was quite low.
In addition to teaching everything they needed to know, I also showed them how to code dynamic SQL statements in REXX code. I had already used REXX in a good bit of the code used for utilities and one-time jobs for the Cash Vault System that I was working on there.
There are few languages that one can learn completely in 3 hours. The Java classes (one AP and two general) took an entire high school year and I only scratched the surface even though I covered all 19 chapters of Cay Horstmann's "Java Essentials".
Those that turn their noses up at REXX I have found to be the same sort of people who think writing code is an IQ test and if they don't write code that no one else can maintain that they have somehow failed. I don't think programming has to be difficult and the best languages are those that are easy to learn and easy to program in while being able to get the job done and run efficiently. For quick and dirty code or seldom run utilities in production, REXX is an ideal language to use. Of course, for a program that is processing 10+ million records sequentially or updating a DB2 database for millions of transactions for real time access you want to use a compilable language.
Be a real man! Increase your cache memory by 300.5GigaCells. Order today!
Your girlfriend will say, "Are you hot? Or is that a gun in your brain?"
I totally agree.
Those that want spamming to continue always come up with ideas that have never been tried do not work. If we don't start stopping spam we will never stop spam. Plug the holes as we go.
Those that put all of their energies into reasons why we cannot stop spam are aiding the spammers. They need to put their energies in addressing and eliminating spam.
The truth is that most spam originates from a relatively small number of sources and all we have to do is shut them down one by one.
Consider it an extension of the war on terror.
The problem is that I want a single thing to look for in the subject line that would allow my outlook Outlook Express 6 to toss them into the delete file without me having to update the message rules every few days.
I don't want to have to continually update the message rules with new subject lines they porn industry creatively comes up with (no pun intended).
Your complaint about Cingular's billing system may be legit but if ATT's is better why do you assume they would get rid of ATT's and not Cingular's?
I switched from Cingular to ATT because when I drove from California to Florida in 2001 there were few places along the way that had Cingular's service. With ATT phone towers and customers added to Cingular, they will probably become the wireless service with the largest and most access points without the "extended range" or other obnoxious status messages that mean more money.
I did like the memory chip in Cingular's phones which I had to give up when switching to ATT but perhaps I will regain that with this merger.
In the mean time I have an offer from ATT on my desk to get $50 credit on my bill if I sign up for a new annual service. Don't know if I would lose the ability of having the roll-over minutes that Cingualr has, a feature I look forward to as I don't use my phone that much.
Maybe Eisner has already undergone the reputed gene therapy and is becoming the super rat.
You present a fake argument.
H1B and L1 visa workers are NOT immigrants. They are prohibited from immigrating by the nature of the visas.
Who ever heard of a rich West Virginian?
Check out the following web sites:
http://www.hireamericancitizens.org/protphotos0
http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/itaa.real.html#tt
http://www.hireamericancitizens.org/underpay.ht
http://www.nomoreh1b.com/
http://www.cpcsguru.com/Perspectives_on_Offshor
http://www.nomoreh1b.com/BankOfAmericaSuicides.
Actually much more spam comes out of Alabama than Florida.
A related problem is the advocation of voting on the internet or any other computerized version of voting that requires some identification.
The problem is that there are two mutually exclusive actions required for voting on the interent.
The first is a valid identification of the voter. Assuming that the voter can be identified, that means the computer would know who is voting.
The second is the annomity of the vote. Assuming a vote was made and the computer knows who voted, because of identification for validating the voter is a registered voter, it is now impossible to not know who voted in what way. A vote that is not annonymous is not a vote but a death warrent.
If you somehow separate the identification of the voter from the vote, then you have no way of knowing if the vote is by a valid voter or not.
The voters are screwed no matter what action they take.
Internet voting could be how we will lose democracy if the average person cannot understand what is at stake.
A scientific study was conducted to document the political affiliation of those that believe in Global Warming. It was determined that if you were a Democrat you were 80% more likely to believe in Global Warming than if you were a Republican.
Since scientific truth is, of course, determined by majority vote and the Democrats have stolen 18 more voting machines in Broward County, FL, to "fix" them for the November election (got to give them credit for trying again), it is obvious that the Democrats are causing Global Warming.
Seems all he is doing is restating the old Greek idea of the atom in modern fashion.
Nothing new under that sun.
Assuming the post is true, they why do we see the light from galaxies over 10 billion light years away? Surely the "light horizon" would prevent that. And if light is bent 90 degrees, them that would only direct us to see them as being in "front" of us. But we would still see them. Seems to be something missing in the argument. Please explain what evidence exists for the "light horizon" from non black hole sources. Interesting idea though. Needs some evidence.