First of all, for whatever reason Iceland let it banks default, it was the right thing to do. And Ireland should have done the same.
Second, is it so hard to believe that "free market fundamentalist" thinks banks should be allowed to default? After all, "Let fall what cannot stand" is a normal free market attitude.
Thridly, free market people rarely claim that the market is all-knowing and infallible. They just claim that the market is better than the alternatives. When, I believe, Milton Friedman said "capatalism is a profit and loss system", he also recognizes, like most other "free market fundamentalist", that capitalism is not perfect. If you want to look for utopia, you need to go to the other side of the political spectrum.
You are turning things upside down. People are upset, that he is burning his own personal copy of the Bible/Koran and that is just silly. If he burned another persons copy of the Koran/Bible, then by all means get upset.
If you decide to burn your own money, it would not make me upset. Not the slightest. Money are just I-Owe-Yours from the government. When you burn money, you resolve the government of it's obligation. So go burn all your own money, it will just mean I have to pay a tiny bit less in taxes.
but if new cards include both the token and the chip, then a compromised ATM can simply use the old-style authentication token to perform a fraudulent transaction
If an ATM that usually gets 5% mag-stripe transactiosn, suddenly gets 100% mag-stripe transactions, it would properly ring some bells at the credit card company.
My sig still holds. MS-Windows (and the machines it typically runs on) is like Budweiser. Cheap, but not worth the price. Once you get used to the good stuff, it's hard to go back to the shit peddled as "The King of Computers."
--
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Unless you think that Microsoft does not really produce software (just markets their wares as such), your sig is way off.
Any time a company says "Minimum X-X years industry experience etc." they're trying to scare people off.
But do they scare the right people off?
Which type of person applies for a job that he, on paper, is not qualified for? People who do not think rules apply to them? People who go for quantity in applications, rather than quality (and may not even have read the requirements properly)? Or are they left with people who don't mind exaggerating? Which might be the same people who gives overly optimistic estimates.
On the other hand, they might just get people who has a realistic view of how the world works. And in many corporate environments you cannot always go by the rules, as then you will get nothing done. But you cannot expect collage graduates to know that, so you you might just get the ones who would exaggerate in any environment.
OK, I had plenty of weasel words in this post, as I am not confident about the answer myself. But I am definitively not sure it is a wise strategy either.
I am with you on this one. Especially, since the bad behavior had decades to build up.
What I do not get, is why the British don't just pay the MPs a fixed amount for the expense of maintaining an extra home. If they use less, they stuff it untaxed in their pocket. If they use more, they take it nondeductible from their pocket. Seems fair to me. After all, if you want your second home to be a small castle, should you not pay for it yourself?
I have heard about this case, only from our local reporters (a live in Denmark, Scandinavia) and they talked of different remedies proposed. And all I could here, was more and more bureaucracy. And sure, in the beginning this is going to work. Especially, since politicians are scared shirtless now. But in 30-40 years, when the case is almost forgotten and the bureaucrats have gotten lazy, they are going to have similar scandal again.
Few people ever seems to answer my question, which is if you want these companies and their policies destroyed, why is it better to download than to not use their products at all?
Because some people want their cake and eat it too. They want to see the new movie and they want to see the record company policies destroyed. Put in other terms, if you really do not intend to buy a movie, then downloading the movie is not hurting anybody. It is victimless crime.
But frankly, I think people downloading movies illegally has a lot more to do with wanting things for free, than with politics.
Yes, that's right, you need to understand a rigorous mathematical construct in order to write a "Hello World" program.
That is just wrong. You do not need to understand the math behind monads to use them. The part of your program that needs side-effects can be programmed like it was an imperative language. Will it help you, if you learn all the details about monads? Sure, but you do not _have to_ learn all the details.
If you still think you have to learn a bundle of math to do IO in Haskell, then look at a Haskell tutorial. You will see that they can teach you plenty of IO, without explaining the math behind monads.
And I am sure this hello world program do not need much explaining:
I think that is the line that divides good corporations from evil corporations; the primacy of profit. A good corp might have profit as second in it's list of priorities after something like "make the best product we can" or "provide a low cost service"
Companies values like "making the best product" or "lowering costs" is just PR-speak for "maximizing profits".
Making the best product is just one way of maximizing profits. The better the quality you can produce, the more you can charge, and therefore your profits goes up.
If you can lower the cost of producing some service, you can lower the price you charge the consumer. Lower price can gain you market share, and therefore increased profits.
And it is beautifully system. The self-interest of improving profits by producing better quality using less resources, is the same as societies interest of producing better quality using less resources.
OpenOffice may be OSS, but it is also backed by Sun. Thus, it seems to me that OpenOffice is already backed by a big name and your executives should be happy with OpenOffice.
"1) No natural resources. Or in other words, there's nothing there that anyone wants...."
Maybe they could run a trading station. Sailors (the non-commercial kind) could go into harbor there and buy stuff. Larger ships could bring the supplies.
It might also be attractive for sailers if the whether were bad. A big platform would better sustain the whether than a small boat.
They could also operate a casino. Hell, they could legalize drugs and prostitution. I am thinking big money from visitors.
This measurement is not particular good - but what software metrics are?
However it is still a brilliant move, as it will motivate a lot of developers to add projects to Ohloh's database. Developers will add just the projects they have contributed to, so that there ranking will go up.
Ephemeral representations of atomic, structured data; usually for transport.
Config files. More verbose and the syntax is far better at keeping you from fat fingering a setting and blowing up your app. If you can't clearly read XML, you need glasses.
I am to understand this as if verbosity is a good thing? If you really think so, then try looking up the definition in a dictionary.
And people do not have trouble reading XML because the lack glasses. They have trouble XML because its signal-to-noise ratio is so low. In other words, people have trouble reading XML because it is so verbose.
Ironically, the lack of pointers, something that computer scientists think is terrible, is actually one of its strengths. If you are trying to parallelize a section of code, having a routine mess with array values through pointers renders the code unparallelizable.
You may be over-generalizing here. Not all computer scientists think that pointers is a wonderful idea. Take a look at Haskell. A language pretty much invented and maintained by computer scientists. To be earnest Haskell do have pointers, but they are almost exclusively used to interface with other programming languages. Mostly C. In ordinary Haskell code you never see any pointers.
And the reason you mention for not having pointers, is just one of the reasons a lot of computer scientists do not like them.
"Computer Scientists can count to 1024 on their fingers" (non-mutant, non-mutilatated, human computer scientists)
unless you value a hand full of zero-fingers as one, then that would be 1023. And honestly what self-respecting computer scientists would count from anything but zero.
I am trying to understand what you are saying here. I am right to conclude that you would still need to compute sin? and thus you would need a sin table?
Yes the Euro is high compared to what it used to be. But that is no reason, in itself, that it will not go higher.
America has a huge trade decifit. This makes the dollar drop in value. However, China has pretty much financed the reckless American economic policy by buying American Dollar. If China had not done this the dollar would be a lot less worth.
The reason China buys American Dollar is that they do not want a too low dollar, as this makes it hard to sell Chinese goods in America.
If China has a change of policy and stops buying Dollar, the Dollar will soon be a lot less worth.
On the other hand, there is a lot of talk about America raising there interest rate. This will lead to a higher Dollar, as American bonds becomes more attractive to foreign investors.
Which way will it go? I do not know. But just because Euro is high compared to what it used to be, is no reason that it will not go even higher. Especially, if the current economic policy of America is continued.
Sigh. Go read some benchmarks. JIT-compiled Java is just as fast as C/C++ for virtually everything.
I have seen some benchmarks comparing Java and C++. None of them resembles how you would actually program in Java. They all use only a minimum of Java. They do not use objects (but only build-in datatypes) and they do not use collection classes.
Collection classes and I think also objects is part of what makes Java slow. All the cast needed when using the Java collection classes costs time.
In C++, you do not need cast when using collection classes, as C++ has generic features.
So please, show me a benchmark which actually resemblems any real Java code.
"Microsoft is just one good idea away from oblivion."
That would have to be one hell of an idea. Even WWW did only hurt MS temporarily. Now, they are the leading (market share) producer of browsers and have fairly good control of the market.
Re:The first 15 posts on this are things you cant
on
What You Can't Say
·
· Score: 1
If he did make many/bold examples, people would have debated them instead of his rant about conventional knowledge. Look at the replies to your own post. People are writing about your "nigger"-example and not about your point about overgeneralization.
1. A year ago, I wrote that HP/Compaq would continue its long slide to oblivion, and if you look underneath the corporate numbers, you'll see I was correct.
SO the corporate numbers are OK then, their stock is up over the year ( reference ) so I'd say so corporate numbers sure are decent, then what basis is there for saying they are performing badly? Perhaps if I refer to an unspecified quantity I can make up a story about it too. Like, er, Dell will start slide into oblivion, which if you look below the corporate numbers (that is below profits, penetration, users, sales, turnover, employment, etc) you will see I am correct. What was I correct about? Well, ask me in a year and I'll tell you.
From the article:
"In plain English: 84 watts on a surface of 1.12
square centimeters - the size of a fingertip!
Extrapolated to square meters that make 840,000
watts or 840 kW. Not exactly true."
Slashdot Mirror
First of all, for whatever reason Iceland let it banks default, it was the right thing to do. And Ireland should have done the same.
Second, is it so hard to believe that "free market fundamentalist" thinks banks should be allowed to default? After all, "Let fall what cannot stand" is a normal free market attitude.
Thridly, free market people rarely claim that the market is all-knowing and infallible. They just claim that the market is better than the alternatives. When, I believe, Milton Friedman said "capatalism is a profit and loss system", he also recognizes, like most other "free market fundamentalist", that capitalism is not perfect. If you want to look for utopia, you need to go to the other side of the political spectrum.
You are turning things upside down. People are upset, that he is burning his own personal copy of the Bible/Koran and that is just silly. If he burned another persons copy of the Koran/Bible, then by all means get upset.
If you decide to burn your own money, it would not make me upset. Not the slightest. Money are just I-Owe-Yours from the government. When you burn money, you resolve the government of it's obligation. So go burn all your own money, it will just mean I have to pay a tiny bit less in taxes.
If an ATM that usually gets 5% mag-stripe transactiosn, suddenly gets 100% mag-stripe transactions, it would properly ring some bells at the credit card company.
Unless you think that Microsoft does not really produce software (just markets their wares as such), your sig is way off.
But do they scare the right people off?
Which type of person applies for a job that he, on paper, is not qualified for? People who do not think rules apply to them? People who go for quantity in applications, rather than quality (and may not even have read the requirements properly)? Or are they left with people who don't mind exaggerating? Which might be the same people who gives overly optimistic estimates.
On the other hand, they might just get people who has a realistic view of how the world works. And in many corporate environments you cannot always go by the rules, as then you will get nothing done. But you cannot expect collage graduates to know that, so you you might just get the ones who would exaggerate in any environment.
OK, I had plenty of weasel words in this post, as I am not confident about the answer myself. But I am definitively not sure it is a wise strategy either.
I am with you on this one. Especially, since the bad behavior had decades to build up. What I do not get, is why the British don't just pay the MPs a fixed amount for the expense of maintaining an extra home. If they use less, they stuff it untaxed in their pocket. If they use more, they take it nondeductible from their pocket. Seems fair to me. After all, if you want your second home to be a small castle, should you not pay for it yourself? I have heard about this case, only from our local reporters (a live in Denmark, Scandinavia) and they talked of different remedies proposed. And all I could here, was more and more bureaucracy. And sure, in the beginning this is going to work. Especially, since politicians are scared shirtless now. But in 30-40 years, when the case is almost forgotten and the bureaucrats have gotten lazy, they are going to have similar scandal again.
Yes, that's right, you need to understand a rigorous mathematical construct in order to write a "Hello World" program.
That is just wrong. You do not need to understand the math behind monads to use them. The part of your program that needs side-effects can be programmed like it was an imperative language. Will it help you, if you learn all the details about monads? Sure, but you do not _have to_ learn all the details.
If you still think you have to learn a bundle of math to do IO in Haskell, then look at a Haskell tutorial. You will see that they can teach you plenty of IO, without explaining the math behind monads.
And I am sure this hello world program do not need much explaining:
module Main where
main = putStrLn "Hello World"
I think that is the line that divides good corporations from evil corporations; the primacy of profit. A good corp might have profit as second in it's list of priorities after something like "make the best product we can" or "provide a low cost service"
Companies values like "making the best product" or "lowering costs" is just PR-speak for "maximizing profits".
Making the best product is just one way of maximizing profits. The better the quality you can produce, the more you can charge, and therefore your profits goes up.
If you can lower the cost of producing some service, you can lower the price you charge the consumer. Lower price can gain you market share, and therefore increased profits.
And it is beautifully system. The self-interest of improving profits by producing better quality using less resources, is the same as societies interest of producing better quality using less resources.
OpenOffice may be OSS, but it is also backed by Sun. Thus, it seems to me that OpenOffice is already backed by a big name and your executives should be happy with OpenOffice.
Parent wrote:
..."
"1) No natural resources. Or in other words, there's nothing there that anyone wants.
Maybe they could run a trading station. Sailors (the non-commercial kind) could go into harbor there and buy stuff. Larger ships could bring the supplies.
It might also be attractive for sailers if the whether were bad. A big platform would better sustain the whether than a small boat.
They could also operate a casino. Hell, they could legalize drugs and prostitution. I am thinking big money from visitors.
This measurement is not particular good - but what software metrics are?
However it is still a brilliant move, as it will motivate a lot of developers to add projects to Ohloh's database. Developers will add just the projects they have contributed to, so that there ranking will go up.
And who decided that IP rights should exists? Who enforce those rights?
You may be over-generalizing here. Not all computer scientists think that pointers is a wonderful idea. Take a look at Haskell. A language pretty much invented and maintained by computer scientists. To be earnest Haskell do have pointers, but they are almost exclusively used to interface with other programming languages. Mostly C. In ordinary Haskell code you never see any pointers.
And the reason you mention for not having pointers, is just one of the reasons a lot of computer scientists do not like them.
Your sig:
"Computer Scientists can count to 1024 on their fingers" (non-mutant, non-mutilatated, human computer scientists)
unless you value a hand full of zero-fingers as one, then that would be 1023. And honestly what self-respecting computer scientists would count from anything but zero.
I am trying to understand what you are saying here. I am right to conclude that you would still need to compute sin? and thus you would need a sin table?
Just to be a pain in the ass. There probably will not be so many cars with IP 10.10.10.432......
Yes the Euro is high compared to what it used to be. But that is no reason, in itself, that it will not go higher.
America has a huge trade decifit. This makes the dollar drop in value. However, China has pretty much financed the reckless American economic policy by buying American Dollar. If China had not done this the dollar would be a lot less worth.
The reason China buys American Dollar is that they do not want a too low dollar, as this makes it hard to sell Chinese goods in America.
If China has a change of policy and stops buying Dollar, the Dollar will soon be a lot less worth.
On the other hand, there is a lot of talk about America raising there interest rate. This will lead to a higher Dollar, as American bonds becomes more attractive to foreign investors.
Which way will it go? I do not know. But just because Euro is high compared to what it used to be, is no reason that it will not go even higher. Especially, if the current economic policy of America is continued.
Sigh. Go read some benchmarks. JIT-compiled Java is just as fast as C/C++ for virtually everything.
I have seen some benchmarks comparing Java and C++. None of them resembles how you would actually program in Java. They all use only a minimum of Java. They do not use objects (but only build-in datatypes) and they do not use collection classes.
Collection classes and I think also objects is part of what makes Java slow. All the cast needed when using the Java collection classes costs time.
In C++, you do not need cast when using collection classes, as C++ has generic features.
So please, show me a benchmark which actually resemblems any real Java code.
"Microsoft is just one good idea away from oblivion."
That would have to be one hell of an idea. Even WWW did only hurt MS temporarily. Now, they are the leading (market share) producer of browsers and have fairly good control of the market.
If he did make many/bold examples, people would have debated them instead of his rant about conventional knowledge. Look at the replies to your own post. People are writing about your "nigger"-example and not about your point about overgeneralization.
SO the corporate numbers are OK then, their stock is up over the year ( reference ) so I'd say so corporate numbers sure are decent, then what basis is there for saying they are performing badly? Perhaps if I refer to an unspecified quantity I can make up a story about it too. Like, er, Dell will start slide into oblivion, which if you look below the corporate numbers (that is below profits, penetration, users, sales, turnover, employment, etc) you will see I am correct. What was I correct about? Well, ask me in a year and I'll tell you.
Firstly, he may not have been refering to their stock price at all. Even if he is, you should probably compare it to the general development of technology stocks, see comparison between HP/Compaq and Nasdaq composite index
From the article: "In plain English: 84 watts on a surface of 1.12 square centimeters - the size of a fingertip! Extrapolated to square meters that make 840,000 watts or 840 kW. Not exactly true."
The true number is 10000 / 1.12 * 84 = 750 KW