Gravity Tractor? You know I love these sky high fantasy ideas to deflect asteroids as much as anyone else but shouldn't we be concentrating on what is real? If an asteroid does threaten Earth in the next few years we will use nuclear demolitions on it. We will not use a gravity tractor, laser beams, or giant snow balls. Nor will we attach plasma engines or mass drivers to it. We will use nuclear demolitions because that is, simply, all we have.
[...]
We wont' use one nuke. We will blowup the big one then we will blow up the smaller ones into smaller pieces. We will do this until the chunks are small enough that the atmosphere will handle. With smaller chunks there is more surface area for the atmosphere to work on. Most importantly the smaller chunks will not "crack the crust" as one fat ass one would.
Blowing up an asteroid isn't necessary, and with only a couple of years' notice, it isn't very effective, either. For details, see:
And you're wrong again about that biker being someone like me. Because when I yell at someone like you for almost running me over, and they just shrug their shoulders instead of indicating somehow that maybe they learned a lesson to be more careful next time, I don't just keep yelling. I smash off your rearview mirror, then beat it to smithereens against your car. If that doesn't sink in the right way, then I smash your window with it. Any funny moves from there, and you've got a guy wearing body armor and a helmet ripping, punching and choking you. Wearing gloves that cover fingerprints. On a motorcycle that can get away without a trace.
How many times have you actually ripped off a rearview mirror, smashed a windshield, or choked a clueless cager?
Before y'all begin hootin' and hollerin', note that the person being charged is this Lori Drew who -- instead of talking to other parents and handling a problem as a mature responsible parent should -- helped drive a vulnerable little girl to suicide. As messed up as the American legal system is becoming with regard to computer and internet law, I hope that they stick it to her and give her the maximum punishment.
I also hope she's punished severely. What she did was evil, and it ought to be against the law, if it isn't already. But that doesn't justify this situation, where laws are being interpreted in such a ridiculous, capricious manner, potentially turning the vast majority of American internet users into felons.
That's if you choose points at random. If you only choose points corresponding to cities with large populations that frequently use internet photo-sharing sites, then your chances of being within 200km of the location become much better.
I'm an experienced drummer, and I was completely baffled by Rock Band's drum kit. None of the patterns felt like "real" drumming (both in terms of the kit layout and the rhythmic feel), and the small sticks and plastic pads made it difficult to use proper sticking techniques. I didn't try expert mode, though, which some people claim is actually easier for real drummers.
The really hilarious thing here is that this means of finding out what version of OSX you're running on didn't even exist until OSX 10.3. How the hell did you find out what version of the OS your application was running on before that? Bring up "About This Macintosh" from the apple menu and steal its RSRCs?:P Prior to 10.3, the solution was to use gestaltSystemVersion constant:
In an earlier reply, I wrote: "The details about what constitutes a major version, a minor version, or a point release vary significantly between different software projects". (Emphasis added.) I'm writing from experience about conventions in software versioning. There's nothing special about an OS or a kernel in this regard.
In any case, Apple's documentation contradicts your claims:
Here's Apple's take on this:
gestaltSystemVersionMajor
The major system version number.
For example, in 10.4.12, this would be the decimal value 10. Available in Mac OS X v10.3 and later.
Declared in Gestalt.h
gestaltSystemVersionMinor
The minor system version number. For example, in 10.4.12, this would be the decimal value 4.
Available in Mac OS X v10.3 and later.
Declared in Gestalt.h
Hey, I don't know about you, but a major release of an OS for me is when the underlying APIs have major changes. Good, I'm glad you've settled that for all of us. Now, in the real world, it isn't so simple. What constitutes a "major change" to an API?
The project I work on the most is gcc, where a minor version release (such as the upcoming 4.4) includes all sorts of new features, some of which might be backwards incompatible. I don't know what will constitute the next "major" gcc release, though some developers advocated switching the major number to 5 to indicate the change from the GPLv2 to the GPLv3.
Yes, and maybe you might want to explain why two applications with no common code should nevertheless share a common numbering system??? Huh? Are you objecting to the comparison between Windows major version releases and Mac major version releases? The details about what constitutes a major version, a minor version, or a point release vary significantly between different software projects. However, that doesn't change the fact that all of the OS X releases are major version number 10.
No, the previous post was correct. The 10 in Mac OS X 10.5.3 is most definately NOT equivalent to the 5/6/7 in Windows. Think of it in terms of the names. Windows 5 = XP, Windows 6 = Vista, Windows 7 =... Mac: 10.3 = Panther, 10.4 = Tiger, 10.5 = Leopard. Do you remember what came before OS X? OS 9. And before that, OS 8. And before that, System (or OS) 7 . . .
Ha! Back in my day we "time machined " using tar -u -g -v -f $backup_disk/$backup_dir/$backup_name $backup_disk? Come on, kid! In my day, we backed up to tape and we liked^H^H^H^H^Htolerated it.
I wonder if there are step-by-step guides for "properly" redacting from PDFs so that this isn't possibel? Maybe a simple guide for Word users as well (please, yes I know, Word sux and Widows blows, but guess what? People use them). Here are NSA's recommendations: http://www.nsa.gov/snac/vtechrep/I333-TR-015R-2005.PDF
I sometimes add comments like that if the brace is closing a deeply nested block Deeply nested blocks is a sure sign of crap code. Don't document crap code, rewrite it. A sure sign? Some code is necessarily complex. Conditional blocks inside nested loops are sometimes necessary for a logical, efficient, and human-readable implementation of an algorithm.
Furthermore, I don't have the luxury of rewriting millions of lines of existing code. I document the parts I touch and I try not to make anything worse, but rewriting "crap code" is not always an option.
Most people using C++/Java/C# end up writing "}//end while" anyway,
Pray god I never have to work on code written by these fictitious "most people".
I'd kill any colleague of mine who wrote such a vacuous comment. With a golf club, in front of its cow-orkers to drive the lesson home, I sometimes add comments like that if the brace is closing a deeply nested block, but then the comment indicates which particular loop or block is ending.
It is probably folklore. But the story during my grad school days was that, Knuth offered 1000$ prize to anyone fining a bug TeX and he doubled it a couple of times. And it was never claimed. If that was true, it is very unlikely he was just flame baiting. He offers rewards for reporting errors is his books and for finding bugs in his code:
Many people save these (usually small) checks as souvenirs. My father -- a frugal mathematician -- received a few $2.56 checks from Knuth, and he promptly cashed each one.
... looks like it falls into the same trap as COBOL. The idea that by making programming languages incredibly verbose, they will somehow become easier to use is a fallacy.
Using "MULTIPLYBY" instead of "*" isn't going to make your code easier to read. From what I've seen (particularly of CWEB), literate programming doesn't change the programming language itself, it just adds a TeX style markup to the comments so that detailed (and nicely typeset) documentation can be generated from the source code. Take a look at some of Knuth's CWEB code, such as his implementation of Adventure:
Slashdot Mirror
Gravity Tractor? You know I love these sky high fantasy ideas to deflect asteroids as much as anyone else but shouldn't we be concentrating on what is real? If an asteroid does threaten Earth in the next few years we will use nuclear demolitions on it. We will not use a gravity tractor, laser beams, or giant snow balls. Nor will we attach plasma engines or mass drivers to it. We will use nuclear demolitions because that is, simply, all we have.
[...]
We wont' use one nuke. We will blowup the big one then we will blow up the smaller ones into smaller pieces. We will do this until the chunks are small enough that the atmosphere will handle. With smaller chunks there is more surface area for the atmosphere to work on. Most importantly the smaller chunks will not "crack the crust" as one fat ass one would.
Blowing up an asteroid isn't necessary, and with only a couple of years' notice, it isn't very effective, either. For details, see:
https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/343984.pdf
Nuclear explosives are a good tool for this job, just not in the way that you think they are.
Nukes are better suited for the primary plan:
https://e-reports-ext.llnl.gov/pdf/343984.pdf
However, simply blowing up the asteroid at the last minute (Armageddon-style) won't help much.
And you're wrong again about that biker being someone like me. Because when I yell at someone like you for almost running me over, and they just shrug their shoulders instead of indicating somehow that maybe they learned a lesson to be more careful next time, I don't just keep yelling. I smash off your rearview mirror, then beat it to smithereens against your car. If that doesn't sink in the right way, then I smash your window with it. Any funny moves from there, and you've got a guy wearing body armor and a helmet ripping, punching and choking you. Wearing gloves that cover fingerprints. On a motorcycle that can get away without a trace.
How many times have you actually ripped off a rearview mirror, smashed a windshield, or choked a clueless cager?
Before y'all begin hootin' and hollerin', note that the person being charged is this Lori Drew who -- instead of talking to other parents and handling a problem as a mature responsible parent should -- helped drive a vulnerable little girl to suicide. As messed up as the American legal system is becoming with regard to computer and internet law, I hope that they stick it to her and give her the maximum punishment.
I also hope she's punished severely. What she did was evil, and it ought to be against the law, if it isn't already. But that doesn't justify this situation, where laws are being interpreted in such a ridiculous, capricious manner, potentially turning the vast majority of American internet users into felons.
Interestingly, DeBranges was Xian-Jin Li's advisor:
http://www.genealogy.math.ndsu.nodak.edu/id.php?id=16641
That's if you choose points at random. If you only choose points corresponding to cities with large populations that frequently use internet photo-sharing sites, then your chances of being within 200km of the location become much better.
If I had my own copy of Rock Band, I'd be inclined to set up my electronic practice kit to work as a controller:
http://www.rockband.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20420
I'm an experienced drummer, and I was completely baffled by Rock Band's drum kit. None of the patterns felt like "real" drumming (both in terms of the kit layout and the rhythmic feel), and the small sticks and plastic pads made it difficult to use proper sticking techniques. I didn't try expert mode, though, which some people claim is actually easier for real drummers.
http://www.cocoadev.com/index.pl?DeterminingOSVersion
In an earlier reply, I wrote: "The details about what constitutes a major version, a minor version, or a point release vary significantly between different software projects". (Emphasis added.) I'm writing from experience about conventions in software versioning. There's nothing special about an OS or a kernel in this regard.
In any case, Apple's documentation contradicts your claims:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=564973&cid=23560319
The major system version number.
For example, in 10.4.12, this would be the decimal value 10. Available in Mac OS X v10.3 and later.
Declared in Gestalt.h
gestaltSystemVersionMinor
The minor system version number. For example, in 10.4.12, this would be the decimal value 4.
Available in Mac OS X v10.3 and later.
Declared in Gestalt.h
gestaltSystemVersionBugFix
The bug fix version number. For example, in 10.4.12, this would be the decimal value 12.
Available in Mac OS X v10.3 and later.
Declared in Gestalt.h From http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Carbon/Reference/Gestalt_Manager/Reference/reference.html.
The project I work on the most is gcc, where a minor version release (such as the upcoming 4.4) includes all sorts of new features, some of which might be backwards incompatible. I don't know what will constitute the next "major" gcc release, though some developers advocated switching the major number to 5 to indicate the change from the GPLv2 to the GPLv3.
Mac:
10.3 = Panther, 10.4 = Tiger, 10.5 = Leopard. Do you remember what came before OS X? OS 9. And before that, OS 8. And before that, System (or OS) 7 . . .
Dammit, "ownedya" has got me beat:
http://www.iqleague.com/user/hnNILyFxZE-i85qpAAAqgg
Okay, so I'm not helping the Slashdot average: my score was 51.04. (Fortunately, I'm in the top 100% in all categories!)
Has anybody managed a lower score?
Furthermore, I don't have the luxury of rewriting millions of lines of existing code. I document the parts I touch and I try not to make anything worse, but rewriting "crap code" is not always an option.
http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/help/Catalogue/entries/texbook.html
I'd kill any colleague of mine who wrote such a vacuous comment. With a golf club, in front of its cow-orkers to drive the lesson home, I sometimes add comments like that if the brace is closing a deeply nested block, but then the comment indicates which particular loop or block is ending.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knuth_reward_check
Many people save these (usually small) checks as souvenirs. My father -- a frugal mathematician -- received a few $2.56 checks from Knuth, and he promptly cashed each one.
... looks like it falls into the same trap as COBOL. The idea that by making programming languages incredibly verbose, they will somehow become easier to use is a fallacy.Using "MULTIPLYBY" instead of "*" isn't going to make your code easier to read. From what I've seen (particularly of CWEB), literate programming doesn't change the programming language itself, it just adds a TeX style markup to the comments so that detailed (and nicely typeset) documentation can be generated from the source code. Take a look at some of Knuth's CWEB code, such as his implementation of Adventure:
http://sunburn.stanford.edu/~knuth/programs/advent.w.gz
It appears to be ordinary C once the CWEB documentation is stripped out.