When the project started it was easier to get involved because the code base was smaller and most people were contributing in their spare time, a few hours here and there on the weekend, while they did their real jobs that brought in money for them to live. Anybody with coding experience will tell you it's much easier to join a project where the code base is fresh rather than work on something that 2 decades worth of ideas implemented by someone who holds all the decisions leading up to why a certain subsystem is written the way it is in their head. It's that knowledge about why a certain piece of code is written the way it is, that you only glean by actually writing the code, making the mistake and learning from it. Expecting a younger person to be able to automagically have this same knowledge when they join the project is short-sighted. The other issue is that Linux may not have started as a commercially driven project, but it is a commercially driven one now. Someone in their spare time wanting to contribute to the kernel can't compete with someone being paid by Oracle to write a file system. They've got better things to do. The solution is to make it worthwhile for younger people to start working on the kernel, because at the moment the barrier for entry is high because commercial interests make it hard for young ones to learn the kernel when all the low hanging fruit is reaped by those paid to work on it, and knowledge required now is higher than it was 20 years ago.
Tends to be a waste of time in my experience. Your novice spare time patches are competing with those from people who are 1) paid to work full time on the code base 2) that they had a significant hand in writing themselves. Note that I have contributed a meagre patch to gcc, so my name's in the changelog in 2004, but it didn't result in me taking off with the gcc project. Maybe I shouldn't have focused on fixing bugs in gcc and added a new feature, since adding new features is easier to do. The most prolific contributors to open source projects are involved in famous open source projects because they are paid to be or their project is not famous and they control it and are the sole contributor.
All of them, or close enough. I play far too many games that having a single one running on Linux isn't enough for me to warrant ditching Windows. 10% running on Linux wouldn't be enough, it would have to be closer to 95%. And for that to happen, there would have to be some sort of miraculous movement of concious thought within the game industry to start developing games for Linux instead of Windows. Lone developers can't shift the industry. Games are the sole reason I use Windows.
He's doing this to raise money for research. I don't think he expects to solve it 'live on TV infront of a studio audience'. It's more like an opportunity for others to be educated about the Riemann hypothesis.
"If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants." - Isaac Newton.
The corollary is there is no such thing as a self-made man.
Yeah I've been working on with open source dev tools in the network appliance domain for several years now but I've come to think that.NET is one of the things that MS did right. Thankfully I haven't been working with Java but c/c++ and python and bash. Java wasn't originally open source and was a poorly designed language that got lots of marketing impetus from Sun, hence it's widespread adoption. You end up with code the calls the AbstractObjectFactory that calls the AbstractAbstractObjectFactory etc and a whole lot of objects that you don't need. At least with C++ you can choose not to use objects and simplify. Same with Python.
Management that requires me print out a timesheet in from excel and then get it printed and signed then I scan the signed document and email it to the appropriate people.
Evidence based estimating is what I'd like to see more of and less of the abracadabra 'story points' rubbish that SCRUM practitioners advocated. At a previous organization we went down the SCRUM road and were told to use story points where a story point is a unit of effort (not time) required to do the task. Naturally all the devs were confused and eventually resorted to equating a story point with a unit of time (like an hour) and not a unit of effort as we were supposed to. There's also the problem were one dev's estimate of say 4 story points is not the same as another dev's estimate of 4 story points. There was never a consensus as to what a 'unit of effort' meant unless it was taken to be equivalent to a unit of time. Evidence based estimating seems to provide a better solution since it tracks the history of an individual dev's estimates, recognising the fact that an individuals estimate will differ from another. So for example if someone has a habit of underestimating a task, because of the feedback that goes into the system after the task is done, the system caters for this when that person makes another estimate.
Yay... now all I need is a farting cow, a playground for the kids and a swamp in my backyard and I'll have enough juice to run my linux desktop. Seriously this kids going to turn into one of those bosses with all the fancy ideas of how things should work, then try and convince other people to do the work for him, and no skills to make anything.
Geany works great in Linux, I see that it's cross platform, so I guess you can also get it to work in Windows. But note that due to Windows not having the same compiler tools as Linux available by default, it might be handier in Windows to have something that comes with its own compiler like Dev-C++:)
Except it has this ability to leave trailing whitespace on the end of lines, can't do buffer local settings (i.e. can't set different a different value for tabstops depending on the file), and the last time I saw someone use it he would tap the space bar several times to indent because Geany's tabs to space conversion was broken and I don't even think it's configurable via some sort of script language. I don't really understand why people don't use one of the more established editors like emacs or vim. If you learn how to use one of those well then you're not going to regret it, but with something like Geany you'll eventually run into problems that these serious editors would already have encountered and solved.
That's a daft argument. You could extend that to say an ethernet frame and say 'oh because ethernet frames are broken up they can't be used to distribute copyrighted data'. Similar argument for reading writing blocks to disk etc... It's pretty obvious bittorent can be used to transmit information copyrighted or not. Their defense should focus on the accuracy identifying weather the information transmitted is copyrighted or not, since people do use bittorrent for legitimate reasons. ISP's probably want to win this case because they are aware of the enormous amount of traffic bittorrent generates, most of it being movies, mp3s etc... Forcing them to curtail this will hurt their revenue. The other side of the coin is that people that create music, movies, software are entitled to license it however they want. If they give it away for free good for you but if they copyright it and require payment for it then that doesn't mean you can just take it from them.
Depends on the error rate there though. For arguments sake, assume juries are hopeless and have a high error rate (i.e. they make the wrong decision in 50% of the cases), whereas the magistrate is getting it right closer to 95% of the time. Then if you're innocent of the charge you're probably better of going with the bench trial and if you're guilty go for a jury trial because they have a higher probability of making the wrong decision. I think that juries are probably more open to a persuasive argument and more vulnerable to preconceived ideas (e.g. OJ Simpson trial) rather than facts and what's in front of them.
To be honest I don't think any of the above qualifies as hardware development design or engineering. To my mind hardware development has to involve things like PCB layout and ASIC design, otherwise you're not really doing hardware development. Even so called 'firmware' for embedded systems is still really software.
I don't know why but the sleep mode on my vista doesn't work properly. If I leave the computer for a few hours it goes into sleep mode but I can't wake it up again.
Check out OCaml. It has C++ like features without the headache. It's more advanced than D and has great performance characteristics. It supports type inference (so you don't need to remember the type of the variable), static typing, generic programming (templates in c++) via modules and functors, concepts (which are meant to be part of c++0x) via signatures, virtual functions via subtyping, and garbage collection. It's also a functional language so you get the core features of functional languages, like pattern matching.
Read the article again... Microsoft are deliberately starting with a low initial price to gain mindshare. After that it's straightforwared to jack up the price incrementally of the course of several years until you're effectively paying whatever they want you to pay. And people will pay, as the NZ AA demonstrated when they switched back to MS Office. The only thing Linux has done is given people some sort of bargaining power when dealing with Microsoft. The reality is most people (i.e. people not reading slashdot) want to use a MS product because of familiarity and ease of use over a Linux based solution. If they can use Linux and OSS as a bargaining tool to lower the price, they will.
Slashdot Mirror
When the project started it was easier to get involved because the code base was smaller and most people were contributing in their spare time, a few hours here and there on the weekend, while they did their real jobs that brought in money for them to live. Anybody with coding experience will tell you it's much easier to join a project where the code base is fresh rather than work on something that 2 decades worth of ideas implemented by someone who holds all the decisions leading up to why a certain subsystem is written the way it is in their head. It's that knowledge about why a certain piece of code is written the way it is, that you only glean by actually writing the code, making the mistake and learning from it. Expecting a younger person to be able to automagically have this same knowledge when they join the project is short-sighted. The other issue is that Linux may not have started as a commercially driven project, but it is a commercially driven one now. Someone in their spare time wanting to contribute to the kernel can't compete with someone being paid by Oracle to write a file system. They've got better things to do. The solution is to make it worthwhile for younger people to start working on the kernel, because at the moment the barrier for entry is high because commercial interests make it hard for young ones to learn the kernel when all the low hanging fruit is reaped by those paid to work on it, and knowledge required now is higher than it was 20 years ago.
Tends to be a waste of time in my experience. Your novice spare time patches are competing with those from people who are 1) paid to work full time on the code base 2) that they had a significant hand in writing themselves. Note that I have contributed a meagre patch to gcc, so my name's in the changelog in 2004, but it didn't result in me taking off with the gcc project. Maybe I shouldn't have focused on fixing bugs in gcc and added a new feature, since adding new features is easier to do. The most prolific contributors to open source projects are involved in famous open source projects because they are paid to be or their project is not famous and they control it and are the sole contributor.
All of them, or close enough. I play far too many games that having a single one running on Linux isn't enough for me to warrant ditching Windows. 10% running on Linux wouldn't be enough, it would have to be closer to 95%. And for that to happen, there would have to be some sort of miraculous movement of concious thought within the game industry to start developing games for Linux instead of Windows. Lone developers can't shift the industry. Games are the sole reason I use Windows.
He's doing this to raise money for research. I don't think he expects to solve it 'live on TV infront of a studio audience'. It's more like an opportunity for others to be educated about the Riemann hypothesis.
Now all Java devs will be able to afford a yacht like Larry's after customers fork out for the non-crippleware version of the jvm.
Oh and Dragon Age from Bioware has heaps of content for single player. It's the best single player experience I've had in ages.
Duke Nukem Forver will have loads of content after 12 years in development.
"If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants." - Isaac Newton. The corollary is there is no such thing as a self-made man.
Yeah I've been working on with open source dev tools in the network appliance domain for several years now but I've come to think that .NET is one of the things that MS did right. Thankfully I haven't been working with Java but c/c++ and python and bash. Java wasn't originally open source and was a poorly designed language that got lots of marketing impetus from Sun, hence it's widespread adoption. You end up with code the calls the AbstractObjectFactory that calls the AbstractAbstractObjectFactory etc and a whole lot of objects that you don't need. At least with C++ you can choose not to use objects and simplify. Same with Python.
Management that requires me print out a timesheet in from excel and then get it printed and signed then I scan the signed document and email it to the appropriate people.
Evidence based estimating is what I'd like to see more of and less of the abracadabra 'story points' rubbish that SCRUM practitioners advocated. At a previous organization we went down the SCRUM road and were told to use story points where a story point is a unit of effort (not time) required to do the task. Naturally all the devs were confused and eventually resorted to equating a story point with a unit of time (like an hour) and not a unit of effort as we were supposed to. There's also the problem were one dev's estimate of say 4 story points is not the same as another dev's estimate of 4 story points. There was never a consensus as to what a 'unit of effort' meant unless it was taken to be equivalent to a unit of time. Evidence based estimating seems to provide a better solution since it tracks the history of an individual dev's estimates, recognising the fact that an individuals estimate will differ from another. So for example if someone has a habit of underestimating a task, because of the feedback that goes into the system after the task is done, the system caters for this when that person makes another estimate.
Yay ... now all I need is a farting cow, a playground for the kids and a swamp in my backyard and I'll have enough juice to run my linux desktop. Seriously this kids going to turn into one of those bosses with all the fancy ideas of how things should work, then try and convince other people to do the work for him, and no skills to make anything.
Geany works great in Linux, I see that it's cross platform, so I guess you can also get it to work in Windows. But note that due to Windows not having the same compiler tools as Linux available by default, it might be handier in Windows to have something that comes with its own compiler like Dev-C++ :)
Except it has this ability to leave trailing whitespace on the end of lines, can't do buffer local settings (i.e. can't set different a different value for tabstops depending on the file), and the last time I saw someone use it he would tap the space bar several times to indent because Geany's tabs to space conversion was broken and I don't even think it's configurable via some sort of script language. I don't really understand why people don't use one of the more established editors like emacs or vim. If you learn how to use one of those well then you're not going to regret it, but with something like Geany you'll eventually run into problems that these serious editors would already have encountered and solved.
That's a daft argument. You could extend that to say an ethernet frame and say 'oh because ethernet frames are broken up they can't be used to distribute copyrighted data'. Similar argument for reading writing blocks to disk etc... It's pretty obvious bittorent can be used to transmit information copyrighted or not. Their defense should focus on the accuracy identifying weather the information transmitted is copyrighted or not, since people do use bittorrent for legitimate reasons. ISP's probably want to win this case because they are aware of the enormous amount of traffic bittorrent generates, most of it being movies, mp3s etc... Forcing them to curtail this will hurt their revenue. The other side of the coin is that people that create music, movies, software are entitled to license it however they want. If they give it away for free good for you but if they copyright it and require payment for it then that doesn't mean you can just take it from them.
You're not old - your slashdot id is greater than 1 000 000
Why worry if a black hole eats the planet? It will kill everyone and no one will be around to care.
Jesus Christ is my dungeon master.
Depends on the error rate there though. For arguments sake, assume juries are hopeless and have a high error rate (i.e. they make the wrong decision in 50% of the cases), whereas the magistrate is getting it right closer to 95% of the time. Then if you're innocent of the charge you're probably better of going with the bench trial and if you're guilty go for a jury trial because they have a higher probability of making the wrong decision. I think that juries are probably more open to a persuasive argument and more vulnerable to preconceived ideas (e.g. OJ Simpson trial) rather than facts and what's in front of them.
To be honest I don't think any of the above qualifies as hardware development design or engineering. To my mind hardware development has to involve things like PCB layout and ASIC design, otherwise you're not really doing hardware development. Even so called 'firmware' for embedded systems is still really software.
Vim 7 does this for c/c++ code. Just turn on spelling (something like :set spell) and it picks out spelling mistakes in comments and strings.
I don't know why but the sleep mode on my vista doesn't work properly. If I leave the computer for a few hours it goes into sleep mode but I can't wake it up again.
Check out OCaml. It has C++ like features without the headache. It's more advanced than D and has great performance characteristics. It supports type inference (so you don't need to remember the type of the variable), static typing, generic programming (templates in c++) via modules and functors, concepts (which are meant to be part of c++0x) via signatures, virtual functions via subtyping, and garbage collection. It's also a functional language so you get the core features of functional languages, like pattern matching.
Read the article again... Microsoft are deliberately starting with a low initial price to gain mindshare. After that it's straightforwared to jack up the price incrementally of the course of several years until you're effectively paying whatever they want you to pay. And people will pay, as the NZ AA demonstrated when they switched back to MS Office. The only thing Linux has done is given people some sort of bargaining power when dealing with Microsoft. The reality is most people (i.e. people not reading slashdot) want to use a MS product because of familiarity and ease of use over a Linux based solution. If they can use Linux and OSS as a bargaining tool to lower the price, they will.
That's crazy. According to the article someone implemented nCk as some sort of average deviation? wtf?
valgrind...oh but you're using windows.