"Selling *anything* at WallyWorld practically guarantees broad exposure in markets "
I think Sun is serious about becoming the biggest Linux vendor, as they suggested a year ago with their china deal where McNealy said "This, I believe, makes us instantaneously the number one Linux desktop play in the planet."
If they're going for volume, you can't beat Wal*Mart and China.
"SCO Group's (Nasdaq: SCOX) lawsuit against the Linux industry has produced what could either be a profitable new market niche or a spectacular new scam: open source insurance....a New York-based start-up called Open Source Risk Management has decided to sell insurance to companies using open source software that fear they may be sued."
Funny, the media didn't recognise is as a scam when HP did it.
"Tags such as EM (emphasis), and STRONG (strong emphasis) are used to emphasize important points....Span's are not needed when the correct tags are used."
So what's the right tag to use for text that represents an author? a director? an actor? a price-per-unit? a shipping-method field? a shipping cost field?
Surely you don't mean to use EM for actors, STRONG for directors, and what for the rest of them???
div's and span's do well here.
Done right, CSS can help multi-platform use.
on
CSS for the LDP?
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Done right, CSS is a great way to separate presentation from display.
Note that all those pages had the exact same html. Only the css changed. In their site (read the page) they have styles for all sorts of displays including wireless friendly ones.
"note that google has its own XML soap interface. So you could easily write one yourself that uses google."
Can't really use google, because the sites it thinks are worth indexing daily aren't necessarily the ones I think are worth indexing daily.
I know my interests - my friends' home pages, my investment portfolio, my local events, my customers, and my competitors, a couple open source projects - and I want an up-to-date database of that content. The rest of the internet, more than 3 clicks away from those interests, I care much less about having an up-to-date index.
Far cheaper than making it into real space, this rocket guy who'se been interviwed on slashdot before has plans for a 35-mile-high rocket like this for entertainment.
I've actually written such a thing - minus the p2p part - can tell it a set of "seed" pages, how "deep" to go, and how frequently to go there.
If people think this'd be a cool open-source project I wouldn't mind throwing out the sources (just ugly nests of perl scripts with a postgresql backend) and seeing what people do with them. Not documented yet. If people are interested, feel free to email me at srchengine-interest@cheapcomplexdevices.com , and if more than a few people ask, I'll put something up and let people know when I wrote enough of a doc to use it.
When I heard "personal search", I thought they meant I'd be running my own crawler/engine/etc.
That would be cool. I set up my crawler to crawl stuff as frequently as I want - i.e. the PR pages of companies who'se stocks I own, every hour, others, who cares.
One step cooler is if my "own" serch engine could share search databases in a kazaa-like-manner with other people I select, so people with similar interests can share the load.
If I recall correctly, one of the guys behind Dylan ended up working on another MIT-based Lisp-Like language called Curl (more info at Curl Corporation).
It did a great job at bringing all the power of Lisp with all the symplicity of HTML. All the equivalents of HTML elements were just lisp-like function calls.
Something like
(text this is (font color=red size=+2 big red text))
Since all markup was just a lisp-like function call like any other, extending the company to do more complicated things - like extending the HMTL-like-markup to do real time raytracing in the browser was really easy.
Unfortunatelly the company suffers from bizzare licensing policies and can't figure out if they're selling a language or products built on the language.
India is emerging as the health-care destination of choice for an
increasing number of surgery candidates, with more than 60,000 foreign
patients from 34 countries treated in its top-flight Apollo Hospitals
chain in the past decade. A delegation of Indian doctors was recently
invited to London to brief British Prime Minister Tony Blair's medical
advisers on flying surgery patients from the United Kingdom to Mumbai
and or New Delhi for operative and post-operative care, allowing them
to recuperate, and flying them back to the UK far cheaper than treating
them at home. Routine cardiac surgery at the best hospitals in India
costs about US$35,000, with a success rate of 98.5 percent, compared
with about $150,000 in the United States. For more complicated problems
that cost far more than that, cost differentials are anywhere from 200
percent to 500 percent to off the chart. And India is not alone; breast
implants in Thailand from top-flight cosmetic surgeons cost as little
as 50,000 baht ($1,260) compared with a median price of about $5,000 in
the United States.
Yeah me too.... on this whole thread I couldn't tell who was kidding and who was taking themselves too seriously... For a second I couldn't tell if you were a devout religious fundamentalist, a guy with an interesting sense of humor, or perhaps a youth.
You'd probably be amused to know how long I spent trying to reword my response so it wouldn't offend a youth, yet provoke an overly-serious moralist.
Article wrote: why shouldn't the Indians just put up their own website to replace CNet, and we can all read what they write direct
Probably because CNet pays them more than they could make running their own web site. Running a web-site would involve getting out and selling ad space and buying lots of bandwidth. Both of these roles are probably more cost-effecively done from the fancy CNet building in San Francisco, because it's a better place to shmooze with advertisers and suppliers.
CNet still has a nice cushion of IPO cash that they can use to pay Indian developers well as well as buying more expensive things like Esther Dyson's EDVentures
I'm sure Esther didn't come cheap, so I think CNet's right when they say it's not just for the money savings. If a writer in India can produce better content for the same price they'll hire one there. If Esther can provide even-better content for a much higher price, they'll hire her too.
My guess is that the cost of the Indian writers to build out the sales side of the proposed website wouldn't be possible in the post-.com-ipo era.
parent wrote: I'd much prefer to walk down the halls of a high school and hear "fuck, that test was hard" than "Darn, that was a hard test, I'd like to kill Mr. Smith for giving it to us."
very well put. If I hadn't already posted here, I'd mod you up.
Rather than outlawing consentual activities and perfectly legal activities, I'd rather they regulated showing all the illegal stuff that they show on TV.
Why's it OK to show people getting shot, robbing banks, beating each other up, etc; while everyday ordanary dialog is being censored.
I'd much rather my kid was exposed to a handful of swearwords and see the occasional brest, then be shown TV shows that makes them think everyone's a criminal so it must be OK.
Movie dialog like threats like "I'm going to kill you" are far more harmful to kids than "oh shit".
How about a law:
If a TV show, movie, etc has all legal content (consentual sex, non-threatening speach) it's OK.
If it has illegal content assaults including threats of violence (regardless of the language), unconsentual sex, murdor, etc, it's rated R at least.
From: Andrew Koenig (ark@alice.att.com) Subject: virtual destructors by default Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Date: 1993-01-03 20:03:56 PST
it is possible to write class definitions that have no virtual functions and nevertheless require a virtual destructor. For instance:
struct Thing { Thing(); ~Thing(); }; struct B { }; struct D: B { Thing t; };
main() { B* bp = new D; delete bp;// Oops! }
The commented line is undefined unless D has a virtual destructor.
And since I suspect you'll be too lazy to look it up, Andrew Koenig is the Project Editor of the ISO/ANSI C++ committee. You explicitly stated that you thought the chair of the committee "doesn't know squat about C++" - will you trust the Project Editor.
"Don't insinuate I'm a bad programmer. "
You might be fine at other languages. But when it comes to C++, aren't you encouraging people to write programs that have undefined behavior and insisting they're safe? IMHO, encouraging undefined behavior on the grounds that it sometimes works is a bad practice.
Parent wrote:
"Go back to my first post point by point and comment. Calling destroy to a base pointer which points to a derived object is SAFE. C++ destroys objects in two steps: first, it calls the destructor, which presumably performs cleanup operatings, then it frees the memory. The amount of memory it frees is determined by a looking based on the memory the pointer points to, not the size of the object."
I'd like to point you to the usenet discussion where James Kanze points out that the compiler is free to use the information about the virtual destructor to determine the location and size of the memory it will be freeing.
James Kanze writes:
...] |> Thus, there are five critical pieces of information that keyword delete |> needs to have access to: |> |> 1. The address of the appropriate destructor. |> 2. The address of the block of memory to be deleted. |> 3. The size of the block of memory to be deleted. |> 4. The address of the appropriate operator delete function. |> 5. The arguments to be passed into operator delete.
How the compiler finds #2 and #3 are its business, and in fact, several solutions are in frequent use. What is true is that if the class has a virtual destructor, the compiler must use the values of the dynamic type (most derived object); without a virtual destructor, it is undefined behavior if the static type and the dynamic type disagree.
This allows the implementation that Robert proposes. In other implementations, however, the compiler will decide what additional information to put in the vtbl (or whether to use that information) according to whether the class has a virtual destructor or not.
Note that in many implementations, the compiler WILL correctly evaluate #2 and #3 even in the absense of a virtual destructor, at least in the case of single inheritance. One possible result of undefined behavior is that the program seems to work. That doesn't mean that you have a correct program.
And before you you don't trust this reference, check James's credentials before saying you know C++ beter than everyone involved with the definition of the language.
" When was it adopted into the ANSI standard? 8 years ago you say? Somehow I doubt that. "
Since you asked when it was adopted into the standard, I went ahead and looked it up. The "using" keyword was in the standard unanimously voted for in November 97 and received official ISO approval Jul 98, so about 6.5 years depending on which date you were asking for. (though as I mentioned the standards body was discussing this keyword since '93 years, so I still stand by 8 years as a likely date in practice)
Since you mentioned you expressed doubt, were you guessing more or less years?
(And I can't help pointing out that since you seem to be asking ISO/IEC 14882:1998, I think you meant ISO not ANSI - and finally, instead of asking, you probably could have looked it up as easily as I did.)
Slashdot Mirror
I think Sun is serious about becoming the biggest Linux vendor, as they suggested a year ago with their china deal where McNealy said "This, I believe, makes us instantaneously the number one Linux desktop play in the planet."
If they're going for volume, you can't beat Wal*Mart and China.
"SCO Group's (Nasdaq: SCOX) lawsuit against the Linux industry has produced what could either be a profitable new market niche or a spectacular new scam: open source insurance....a New York-based start-up called Open Source Risk Management has decided to sell insurance to companies using open source software that fear they may be sued."
Funny, the media didn't recognise is as a scam when HP did it.
What the Linux community needs is a solid defeat of their suits - not a lucrative buyout triggering golden-parachutes for the execs.
If all it takes is a couple empty threats to sell for tens to hundreds of millions of dollars, it's the wrong message to send.
So what's the right tag to use for text that represents an author? a director? an actor? a price-per-unit? a shipping-method field? a shipping cost field?
Surely you don't mean to use EM for actors, STRONG for directors, and what for the rest of them???
div's and span's do well here.
The best examples online are still probably this and this and even and slashdot style
Note that all those pages had the exact same html. Only the css changed. In their site (read the page) they have styles for all sorts of displays including wireless friendly ones.
Can't really use google, because the sites it thinks are worth indexing daily aren't necessarily the ones I think are worth indexing daily.
I know my interests - my friends' home pages, my investment portfolio, my local events, my customers, and my competitors, a couple open source projects - and I want an up-to-date database of that content. The rest of the internet, more than 3 clicks away from those interests, I care much less about having an up-to-date index.
Far cheaper than making it into real space, this rocket guy who'se been interviwed on slashdot before has plans for a 35-mile-high rocket like this for entertainment.
If people think this'd be a cool open-source project I wouldn't mind throwing out the sources (just ugly nests of perl scripts with a postgresql backend) and seeing what people do with them. Not documented yet. If people are interested, feel free to email me at srchengine-interest@cheapcomplexdevices.com , and if more than a few people ask, I'll put something up and let people know when I wrote enough of a doc to use it.
That would be cool. I set up my crawler to crawl stuff as frequently as I want - i.e. the PR pages of companies who'se stocks I own, every hour, others, who cares.
One step cooler is if my "own" serch engine could share search databases in a kazaa-like-manner with other people I select, so people with similar interests can share the load.
P2P would be awesome for special-interest search.
(text this is (graph finances) an interactive graph of a company's finances)
would put an interactive graph in the middle of the paragraph.
It did a great job at bringing all the power of Lisp with all the symplicity of HTML. All the equivalents of HTML elements were just lisp-like function calls. Something like
Since all markup was just a lisp-like function call like any other, extending the company to do more complicated things - like extending the HMTL-like-markup to do real time raytracing in the browser was really easy.
Unfortunatelly the company suffers from bizzare licensing policies and can't figure out if they're selling a language or products built on the language.
I bet Novell and Red Hat and IBM bring a expensive-samba-with-royalties-for-patents to the party.
Note that Novell isn't a charity, and selling interoperability to corporations is exactly one of their strenghts.
Sounds like it would _save_ $thousands for companies to switch.
and another
You'd probably be amused to know how long I spent trying to reword my response so it wouldn't offend a youth, yet provoke an overly-serious moralist.
Probably because CNet pays them more than they could make running their own web site. Running a web-site would involve getting out and selling ad space and buying lots of bandwidth. Both of these roles are probably more cost-effecively done from the fancy CNet building in San Francisco, because it's a better place to shmooze with advertisers and suppliers.
CNet still has a nice cushion of IPO cash that they can use to pay Indian developers well as well as buying more expensive things like Esther Dyson's EDVentures
I'm sure Esther didn't come cheap, so I think CNet's right when they say it's not just for the money savings. If a writer in India can produce better content for the same price they'll hire one there. If Esther can provide even-better content for a much higher price, they'll hire her too.
My guess is that the cost of the Indian writers to build out the sales side of the proposed website wouldn't be possible in the post-.com-ipo era.
So long as neither the man nor the woman mind the act, I don't think either are bad people.
Assuming you've ever had your penis in a mouth, are you calling that woman bad?!? If so, does she know you think she's a bad person?
(assuming you're male. think tongue and other body part if your gender is not male)
very well put. If I hadn't already posted here, I'd mod you up.
Why's it OK to show people getting shot, robbing banks, beating each other up, etc; while everyday ordanary dialog is being censored.
I'd much rather my kid was exposed to a handful of swearwords and see the occasional brest, then be shown TV shows that makes them think everyone's a criminal so it must be OK.
Movie dialog like threats like "I'm going to kill you" are far more harmful to kids than "oh shit".
How about a law:
And yet another member of the C++ standards committee directly contradicts your claim.
And since I suspect you'll be too lazy to look it up, Andrew Koenig is the Project Editor of the ISO/ANSI C++ committee. You explicitly stated that you thought the chair of the committee "doesn't know squat about C++" - will you trust the Project Editor."Don't insinuate I'm a bad programmer. "
You might be fine at other languages. But when it comes to C++, aren't you encouraging people to write programs that have undefined behavior and insisting they're safe? IMHO, encouraging undefined behavior on the grounds that it sometimes works is a bad practice.
I'd like to point you to the usenet discussion where James Kanze points out that the compiler is free to use the information about the virtual destructor to determine the location and size of the memory it will be freeing.
James Kanze writes:
And before you you don't trust this reference, check James's credentials before saying you know C++ beter than everyone involved with the definition of the language.Indeed, considering that they made this work well with the debian-based morphix-core module.
"Sun's director of Linux Software Engineering contacted me and apologized, ... they used our Morphix-base module
Looks like Sun's doing a good job at bringing together the best of all worlds.
Since you asked when it was adopted into the standard, I went ahead and looked it up. The "using" keyword was in the standard unanimously voted for in November 97 and received official ISO approval Jul 98, so about 6.5 years depending on which date you were asking for. (though as I mentioned the standards body was discussing this keyword since '93 years, so I still stand by 8 years as a likely date in practice)
Since you mentioned you expressed doubt, were you guessing more or less years?
(And I can't help pointing out that since you seem to be asking ISO/IEC 14882:1998, I think you meant ISO not ANSI - and finally, instead of asking, you probably could have looked it up as easily as I did.)
I think they'll follow whoever the biggest commercial Linux distros, and today that means RedHat and Novell/SuSE.
Why support XFree86 if the big distros are dropping it?