You're not going to be a very good ASIC designer if you don't know that the row and column decoders for a memory block require O(log n) amount of gates.
A math teacher for example should grade a student's reasoning, not the final answer.
That's the great thing about math. If your reasoning is correct, you'll get the right answer. And no whining: "but I made a trivial mistake when I added two and three and got seven". No Sh*t. Learn to add properly, and you'll get a better grade next time. The only valuable lesson learned from "partial credit" is how to BS your way out of a predicament.
That would be like saying if the HURD could spend $1billion on R&D they could probably produce a finished OS. The lack of the $1 billion is the key here.
You could always give a regular
donation to support the development of the Hurd.
Well, I'd guess the people writing software would care. And I want to keep those people happy. Using a tedious language like C doesn't seem like a good way to make people happy. Also if you care about quality and security you'd care about the implementation language. Here's an interesting quote from Theo de Raadt...
So, that's where we started, but over time we actually have found a newer class of security problems called integer overflows. Let's say, for example, that you have an integer and you multiply it by another integer. Well, if one of them is user-controllable, what the attacker's going to do is provide you a very large number so that the multiplication actually overflows, the high bits of the result get thrown away, and the result is actually a small number. Programmers only really check the results of such computations; they don't check beforehand. This actually ended up being a security hole about seven and a half years ago in OpenSSH, and it was really, really subtle. It was so subtle, that type of bug, that we realized that this was no longer an API-type of programmer mistake, but that people don't actually understand the C programming language, or even basic arithmetic with restricted-size variables.
This integer overflow thing is really scary because as programmers, we really can't spot them; we can read the code, and they'll just go right over our heads. We can't even spot them, even if we know what we're doing.
People who start projects to write a new OS do so for a reason that's less than compelling for the general public.
General public? Who cares about the general public? I'd be much more concerned about the interested hacker. And doing Yet Another Posix Operating System written in C probably isn't going to cut it. Maybe someone will take the ideas in the Hurd and create an OS with a more interesting language like Haskell.
Maybe it's just me, but I wouldn't hold up any of the following sentances as the model of clear and concise language...
Reading a post, a report (comma) or an email from someone who you know is technically adept but suffers from poor English skills is like watching a flickering television set.
You know the message is there but you have to view it several times before you get through the static to what it actually means.
It takes very little time and effort to get spelling and grammar correct and to not make at least an effort is just being contemptuous of the reader.
If anyone is "missing something", it's those that (who) defend bad English usage.
It's not acceptable, it's lazy and frankly (comma)if you can't even try (to) communicate properly(comma) then you probably don't deserve to be heard.
THAT is basic people skills,
In fact, let's try to rewrite the whole thing...
The diction matters because it distorts the message. That's the whole point of diction -- it defines the parameters for getting the message through.
Reading a post from someone with poor English skills is like watching a flickering television set. You know the message is there, but the static detracts from it.
Poor diction from someone who should know better is simply inconsiderate. It takes little time and effort to make sure spelling and grammar are correct. Making only the minimal amount of effort shows contempt for the reader.
If anyone is "missing something", it is those who defend bad English usage. It is unacceptable. And lazy. Frankly, if you cannot try to communicate properly, then you probably don't deserve to be heard. THAT is the essence of basic people skills. Take note: I rarely humor those who express such contempt for their readers.
If your understanding is clouded by someone's bad grammar, then by all means, ask for a clarification. The annoyance comes from correction of a minor mistakes, when the poster's intent is clear. "Should of" is a example of this. I'll generally give the benefit of the doubt in instances like this since...
"Should of" sounds a lot like "Should've"
Using contractions in formal settings is frowned upon. The poster tried to use a contraction. Therefore, he's not trying to be formal.
Slashdot and other forums (by their design) encourage a rush to post, since the earliest posts get the most replies.
If nothing else, correcting someone publicaly should be the last resort. If you wouldn't announce on the loud speaker that someone's pants were unzipped, you might want to try correcting them through private communication first.
I sometimes wonder if I'm one of the last generations (I'm 34) who will have any solid grounding in grammar, spelling, and basic English constructs for the future.
Yes. Let me reassure you that you are indeed the special shining star that your mother told you. The climax of humanity, if I may. Some day, I'm sure we'll all worship you and your grammatical correctness. It is truely the end of an era. I don't know how we'll manage. <sniff>
When I am posting here, I am giving my opinion on a topic. The content is what is important. I feel this is the wrong forum for your 'corrections' and 'suggestions.' It breaks the flow of the discussion. It has nothing to do with the topic being discussed, and makes you sound like a show off intellectual
Intellectual? Actually, it makes a person sound like pedantic half-wit. There is a difference between conversational and formal writing. And/. isn't the latter.
Macs generally have a much longer time between upgrades than PCs (I still have a 4-year-old G4 running strong, with no need to upgrade yet, whereas a PC from 4 years ago can't even run _half_ the spyware that's installed on it;)
I sure am proud that we always stick with real tangible facts, and don't succumb to the lure of making generalizations based on antecodal evidence. Oops.
Apparently Dvorak developed a taste for being correct after the Mac-on-Intel news (even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while)
You haven't been following Dvorak long enough. He's been on the case of MS astroturf for a long time. When you have the time, look up some of his articles about when MS was putting out flawed whitepapers on OS/2 benchmarking and dropping hints that TeamOS/2 members were crazy fanatics.
Also, don't forget that people have been thinking about this problem for a long time. So be sure to check the literature...
Parallel computers with tens of thousands of processors are typically programmed in a data parallel style, as opposed to the control parallel style used in multiprocessing. The success of data parallel algorithms - even on problems that at first glance seem inherently serial - suggests that this style of programming has much wider applicability than was previously thought.
It may be the case that that particular TV might be able to recieve off-the-air digital TV, but I'd be wary of the weasel words in the feature list...
HD-Ready: Fully capable of high-definition display when connected to an optional HDTV source (over-the-air, satellite or digital-cable set-top box). Conventional analog TV reception is provided via a built-in NTSC tuner.
Not to be pedantic, but usually we refer to that as unwanted interference. The term noise it usually reserved for random natural phenomena with a white or 1/f frequency spectra.
Which would you rather have, a coloring book or NeoOffice/J?
I'd rather see a coloring book program on a Free Software platform, as opposed to "Yet Another Office Suite" ported to a closed source operating system like the Mac. I'm just guessing here, but I'd be willing to bet most of the people who signed on to the LinuxFund wouldn't want their dollars spent on programs running on an Apple OS.
Don't forget the energy content in your laptop's battery. Oh, yeah, the one made from lithium. I wouldn't be surprised if a group of middle eastern buisness men traveling with their laptops and cell phones and extra batteries couldn't rig up something to blow the hinges of any 'secured' cockpit door. Oops, at least they didn't use a knife. Better luck next time I guess.
Slashdot Mirror
Ahh. That explains the demise of Phrack I guess.
As long as we're dreaming up OS wishlists, I'd like to be able to run the Hurd and an OS which incorporates ideas from the Synthesis project.
Of course I meant "publicly".
touché
- "Should of" sounds a lot like "Should've"
- Using contractions in formal settings is frowned upon. The poster tried to use a contraction. Therefore, he's not trying to be formal.
- Slashdot and other forums (by their design) encourage a rush to post, since the earliest posts get the most replies.
If nothing else, correcting someone publicaly should be the last resort. If you wouldn't announce on the loud speaker that someone's pants were unzipped, you might want to try correcting them through private communication first.Can anyone recommend a good Intro-to-JS book (not an intro to programming book) that doesn't get bogged down in web-related/browser details?
CMT, meet CTM
Don't forget the energy content in your laptop's battery. Oh, yeah, the one made from lithium. I wouldn't be surprised if a group of middle eastern buisness men traveling with their laptops and cell phones and extra batteries couldn't rig up something to blow the hinges of any 'secured' cockpit door. Oops, at least they didn't use a knife. Better luck next time I guess.