I love Firefox on Windows, but it's just really too bad they can't match Mac OS X's look on Mac OS X. In particular, the boxy little Windows-like buttons and ugly popup menus have to go.
Maybe it does make sense. But what it proves is that C++ (at least as implemented by GCC, but it's probably a design flaw) is slower than expected, not that Java is blazingly fast.
Here's a clue: If it's bulk and you didn't ask for it, it's spam. It doesn't matter if it is a product you want, or an opinion you want to read, or a service you want.
People who care more about content than delivery -- "Oh, well, I didn't ask for that ad, but sure I need my penis enlarged!" "Hey, I could make a lot of money helping this exiled Nigerian prince!" "I'm awful glad senatorial candidate McDuff sent out 3.5 million emails (1 million of them outside his area) to let us all know he supports gun control." -- are what's known as a willing victim. And that one moron in a thousand is why there's a spam problem to begin with.
If it's spam, either report it, teach your filter it, or delete it. But do not put any put any weight in the content, even if you find it interesting.
Because little Joey Adams who went missing off the deck of his house in the summer of 1999 never actually went fucking missing, the FBI just took him back from the parent who didn't have custody of him.
The only way you could operate a do-not-spam list would be to have the FCC provide the SMTP servers. And once that happens, it would become trivial for everyone to block those servers. Anything else is exploitable by discovering the content of the list and exporting it.
Wait... the FCC provides the servers and everyoen blocks them? What was my problem with a do not spam list again?:)
Actually, you're right, I didn't. I skimmed it looking for an official link back to AOL, then dismissed it as rumor mongering when I couldn't find one.:)
Yahoo's audio/vido is terrible in my experience. The audio isn't continous, for starters. You can use push to talk or set it to "auto," but auto is terrible at picking up when you start talking.
I wouldn't dream of programming an application today in assembly language.
Yet at the same time, someone who has been exposed to assembly but can not code in it... well, they probably can't really code in any language.
Being language agnostic is important. Sure, you can prefer to code in this language or that, but if you can't sit down at a new language and learn the basics in a few days you're not that talented, really.
I see a meta-assembly being useful today; a simplified instruction set with emulator that needs to be coded using a very simple set (say, less than 16) instructions. This would be a great way to cut your teeth and learn how a computer "works." Does it matter that a modern computer has caches, instruction re-ordering and so forth? No. The basics are the idea of registers for working variables, and memory storage as mid-term storage, mathematic operations, and branching.
I don't see learning a particular processor's assembly instructions as terribly useful. My 6809 knowledge is pretty low, and my 680x0 knowledge is even lower. About the only thing I know about x86 is that the byte order is hard to read.:) But I think I'm well served by the concepts I learned. And I think anyone who has programmed a virtual computer with an instruction set of 16 instructions is less likely to be unable to jump from, say, C to Pascal to Perl.
Certainly, the ability to optimize a bottleneck for speed is nice, but I think that's less important than the grasp of the basics.
To summarize that (I guess I went on too long), I see the ability to code in assembly as more important in learning to program (and evaluating someone's abilities) than in making or even optimizing working, non-trivial desktop applications.
I've seen some pretty dumbass code in my day. And it probably would have been easier to spot the guy's lack of talent in a few hours at an assembly level than a month later in a high-level language.
I can do better than that. I regularily talk to my wife in the Philippines on a 43k dialup (I'm on broadband). The results are less than perfect, with her voice cutting out occasionally -- especially when her prepaid ISP is heavily loaded -- but they're much less frustrating than standard long distance. And I get the satisfaction that, well, sure it's crappy sometimes... but at least I'm not getting charged $0.25 per minute for it. It actually works out closer to $0.01 per minute, because of her dialup. And if the connection is decent, we can send stills from the web cam to each other.
I'm hoping to get her onto a better ISP soon. I think if she could get 56k consistently we'd have a lot fewer problems... and probably need less of a buffer (and thus, less delay).
iChat AV rocks. I never thought it would work on 43k dialup.
Yes, they've changed. Or at least they have if you use Mach-O. And they changed again in 10.1 or 10.2 when someone pointed out that Mach-O was actually way less efficient than CFM.
When I'm typing using a US dictionary, it's workds like colour that it marks as mispelled. But when I'm using a UK dictionary, it highlights as incorrect "new" words like prioritize or finalize. Maybe those are bad examples, since I don't think "finalise" is ever correct -- the more general problem when using a UK dictionary is that -ize endings are corrected to -ise.
There's a few other problems. For instance, some sources say that the correct spellings are "honour" and "honorable"... note the dropped "u" when an ending is added. Yes, that was intentional on my part -- and a UK dictionary would insist on the "u." Some Canadian English dictionaries insist on the "u" as well.
I used to have a really great Canadian writing guide from college, but I think I dumped a litre of Dr. Pepper on it a few years back.
A few years ago, I added a spell checker to an application I wrote. I tried to find a Canadian English wordlist, either complete or as a supplement to a British or American dictionary.
It's very difficult to find. I eventually concluded I was going to have to contact some Canadian publishers, and around that time I decided not to bother.
Presumably, other Canadians did what I did -- use the American dictionary and correct it from time to time.
SMS are sent over TCP/IP. What's the marginal cost to send a 100 byte packet over an unsaturated cellular network, over TCP/IP, and down through another unsaturated cellular network?
I guarantee you it isn't $0.25, which is what my cell company wants.
What cost? Well, almost none, but in North America they can get away with it. I pay a couple dollars a month to get a bundle o fa few hundred messages. That's a better way of handling it, IMO.
Every now and then, I download something to disable it and then find I miss it. But yes, I use it more often by mistake than on purpose.
I've often thought it should require an extra key to activate, such as shift. Shift-capslock to turn it on, capslock again to turn it off. Best of both worlds. Alternatively, it could just be moved to somewhere other than the home row.
I'm not a parent myself (yet), but the company I'm working for has a lot of coders who are parents. It doesn't seem to cause too much trouble for them, as long as management is reasonable on estimates (which is usually the case).
I'll see if I can draw their attention to this article, though.
Slashdot Mirror
I love Firefox on Windows, but it's just really too bad they can't match Mac OS X's look on Mac OS X. In particular, the boxy little Windows-like buttons and ugly popup menus have to go.
Maybe it does make sense. But what it proves is that C++ (at least as implemented by GCC, but it's probably a design flaw) is slower than expected, not that Java is blazingly fast.
Political opinions? You want them?
Here's a clue: If it's bulk and you didn't ask for it, it's spam. It doesn't matter if it is a product you want, or an opinion you want to read, or a service you want.
People who care more about content than delivery -- "Oh, well, I didn't ask for that ad, but sure I need my penis enlarged!" "Hey, I could make a lot of money helping this exiled Nigerian prince!" "I'm awful glad senatorial candidate McDuff sent out 3.5 million emails (1 million of them outside his area) to let us all know he supports gun control." -- are what's known as a willing victim. And that one moron in a thousand is why there's a spam problem to begin with.
If it's spam, either report it, teach your filter it, or delete it. But do not put any put any weight in the content, even if you find it interesting.
Because little Joey Adams who went missing off the deck of his house in the summer of 1999 never actually went fucking missing, the FBI just took him back from the parent who didn't have custody of him.
It really doesn't work.
The only way you could operate a do-not-spam list would be to have the FCC provide the SMTP servers. And once that happens, it would become trivial for everyone to block those servers. Anything else is exploitable by discovering the content of the list and exporting it.
Wait... the FCC provides the servers and everyoen blocks them? What was my problem with a do not spam list again? :)
Har! Forgot about that, so thanks. :)
Don't forget Hitachi, which has a 400GB disk with your choice of ATA or SATA. That was back in March.
Actually, you're right, I didn't. I skimmed it looking for an official link back to AOL, then dismissed it as rumor mongering when I couldn't find one. :)
Yahoo's audio/vido is terrible in my experience. The audio isn't continous, for starters. You can use push to talk or set it to "auto," but auto is terrible at picking up when you start talking.
I can't say I've tried MSN's services.
I mean, give me a break. Next thing you know we'll be asked to protest by sending chain IMs around.
The secondary SMTP port is 587.
I wouldn't dream of programming an application today in assembly language.
Yet at the same time, someone who has been exposed to assembly but can not code in it... well, they probably can't really code in any language.
Being language agnostic is important. Sure, you can prefer to code in this language or that, but if you can't sit down at a new language and learn the basics in a few days you're not that talented, really.
I see a meta-assembly being useful today; a simplified instruction set with emulator that needs to be coded using a very simple set (say, less than 16) instructions. This would be a great way to cut your teeth and learn how a computer "works." Does it matter that a modern computer has caches, instruction re-ordering and so forth? No. The basics are the idea of registers for working variables, and memory storage as mid-term storage, mathematic operations, and branching.
I don't see learning a particular processor's assembly instructions as terribly useful. My 6809 knowledge is pretty low, and my 680x0 knowledge is even lower. About the only thing I know about x86 is that the byte order is hard to read. :) But I think I'm well served by the concepts I learned. And I think anyone who has programmed a virtual computer with an instruction set of 16 instructions is less likely to be unable to jump from, say, C to Pascal to Perl.
Certainly, the ability to optimize a bottleneck for speed is nice, but I think that's less important than the grasp of the basics.
To summarize that (I guess I went on too long), I see the ability to code in assembly as more important in learning to program (and evaluating someone's abilities) than in making or even optimizing working, non-trivial desktop applications.
I've seen some pretty dumbass code in my day. And it probably would have been easier to spot the guy's lack of talent in a few hours at an assembly level than a month later in a high-level language.
I'd put money on 3rd quarter 2005 or later.
I can do better than that. I regularily talk to my wife in the Philippines on a 43k dialup (I'm on broadband). The results are less than perfect, with her voice cutting out occasionally -- especially when her prepaid ISP is heavily loaded -- but they're much less frustrating than standard long distance. And I get the satisfaction that, well, sure it's crappy sometimes... but at least I'm not getting charged $0.25 per minute for it. It actually works out closer to $0.01 per minute, because of her dialup. And if the connection is decent, we can send stills from the web cam to each other.
I'm hoping to get her onto a better ISP soon. I think if she could get 56k consistently we'd have a lot fewer problems... and probably need less of a buffer (and thus, less delay).
iChat AV rocks. I never thought it would work on 43k dialup.
Yes, they've changed. Or at least they have if you use Mach-O. And they changed again in 10.1 or 10.2 when someone pointed out that Mach-O was actually way less efficient than CFM.
I'm not sure about CFM. It's probably the same.
This is probably what you want.
Thank you! Okay, so if I keep trying UK English dictionaries in programs I'll eventually find a good one. :)
Interestingly, ASpell seems to get it wrong as well.
When I'm typing using a US dictionary, it's workds like colour that it marks as mispelled. But when I'm using a UK dictionary, it highlights as incorrect "new" words like prioritize or finalize. Maybe those are bad examples, since I don't think "finalise" is ever correct -- the more general problem when using a UK dictionary is that -ize endings are corrected to -ise.
There's a few other problems. For instance, some sources say that the correct spellings are "honour" and "honorable"... note the dropped "u" when an ending is added. Yes, that was intentional on my part -- and a UK dictionary would insist on the "u." Some Canadian English dictionaries insist on the "u" as well.
I used to have a really great Canadian writing guide from college, but I think I dumped a litre of Dr. Pepper on it a few years back.
A few years ago, I added a spell checker to an application I wrote. I tried to find a Canadian English wordlist, either complete or as a supplement to a British or American dictionary.
It's very difficult to find. I eventually concluded I was going to have to contact some Canadian publishers, and around that time I decided not to bother.
Presumably, other Canadians did what I did -- use the American dictionary and correct it from time to time.
SMS are sent over TCP/IP. What's the marginal cost to send a 100 byte packet over an unsaturated cellular network, over TCP/IP, and down through another unsaturated cellular network?
I guarantee you it isn't $0.25, which is what my cell company wants.
What cost? Well, almost none, but in North America they can get away with it. I pay a couple dollars a month to get a bundle o fa few hundred messages. That's a better way of handling it, IMO.
Actually, Pascal and C shared a single calling convention on the PowerPC architecture.
On the PowerPC, the calling convention uses registers. Sorta. If you want to understand it, Google it... it's quite complicated. :)
On 68k, the calling conventions for Pascal and C are different. There's a lot more to it, but some of the highlights:
C 680x0
Pascal 680x0
Maybe rename the key entirely, but keep the caps lock behavior for when both shift keys are pressed at the same time.
Every now and then, I download something to disable it and then find I miss it. But yes, I use it more often by mistake than on purpose.
I've often thought it should require an extra key to activate, such as shift. Shift-capslock to turn it on, capslock again to turn it off. Best of both worlds. Alternatively, it could just be moved to somewhere other than the home row.
Thanks. I'll tell my boss, who loves the poster but doesn't (I think) know that it was a shot at IBM. That will make him love it more... :)
My high school had a Pascal Spoken Here poster in the early 90s. I bet they threw it out.
Does anyone know the story behind Apple's THINK (not think different) poster?
This poster just has the word THINK in six colors, and a copyright notice (which I forget) in black-on-block at the bottom.
I'm not a parent myself (yet), but the company I'm working for has a lot of coders who are parents. It doesn't seem to cause too much trouble for them, as long as management is reasonable on estimates (which is usually the case).
I'll see if I can draw their attention to this article, though.