I've been wanting to try that same thing for some time now. Ball and spring source files. I even thought Linux would be more interesting than any of my projects. You've proved all that correct! I was hoping to ray trace it though and allow grabbing and stretching/pulling via mouse. If you can output a text file for the connectivity I can do RT quickly, the challenge was going to be parsing everything. I figured this could help with code structuring - you want low connectivity for clean code. Or at least loosely connected small tangles. I suspect this would show most people that their code is more of a mess than they realize.
I've found over the years that even rocket science isn't Rocket Science. So the internet could be Rocket Science, but that doesn't mean it's hard to understand.
I still wish I got my "Certified Rocket Scientist" certificate when I was working at Hughes. No one had a fresh copy to put my name on:-)
Much as I hate it
on
World of Ends
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I always thought the "information highway" analogy was most accurate. The net is simply a way to get your data from here to there. This makes it clear that the only way to make money from the net is in construction/materials (think Cisco) but like road construction I can pay anyone that knows how to do that. Or put up a toll booth, bu notice how many real roads don't have em because people take other routes. It's like infrastructure - everyone uses it, but it's not a business in itself. Get a clue, provide something of value and people will give you money for it. And remember, what used to be of value may not be today.
The Write brothers. They weren't in isolation - they corresponded with other "crackpots" while well respected people said it was impossible. Never mind the Politics that took place afterward. Langley, PTO, Smithsonian, etc...
Andrew Wiles. Proof of FLT is a correlary to ground breaking work done in relative isolation.
There are lots of cases where small groups or individuals made significant advances. Sometimes they happen to be employed by big companies (IC at TI for example) but they are still small groups or an individual. Only someone backed by big organizations would say advances tend to come from same.
I'd argue that only small groups or individuals can make significant breakthroughs. Any large effort will be screwed up by politics. This is the reason we have start-ups, and the CATS prize.
Perhap after strengthening it. First thing is to deploy more of them. Suppose you start shipping cargo up the elevator... Alternative methods to get payloads to space are so expensive in comparison that support for them dries up. If something happens to the elevator, there would be no way to build a new one. Naturally there will always be some need for rockets, but suppose the shuttle program stops and you need people in the LEO part of deployment of a first elevator? Better make at least 2 and keep them separated.
One of the first things they said in economics class was to make your graph start at zero to prevent this kind of thing. Since econ is required for MBAs even more than EEs (me) and companies always use this practice, it has been a valuable lesson to me. Look at the day charts for DJIA or NASD, they always appear spectacular with one of 4 descriptions:
1) Big Gain
2) Big Loss
3) Early gain followed by a retreat
4) Early decline and then recovery
Always a news-worthy day based on the chart because it covers the full range - never mind that we scaled it that way on purpose.
To periodically destroy documents relating to developments they patented and then sued others for infringing. It'd be cool if they could actually destroy those patents too:-)
The only connection it has with "News For Nerds" is the fact that it is a Chip-Making company....
And the fact that they went into JEDEC meetings to help define an open standard and then patented things being developed there. The RAMBUS saga is about abuse of the processes used to develop new standards. Rambus has yet to be properly dealt with for that, and that make an update on their case "News for Nerds" as much as anything.
Remember that R&D consists of Research and Development. It's the D that rightly targets the bottom line. The R should not be directed that way at all. Remember, when a company saturates its market and still wants to grow, they start doing something different (or buy a company that does). If all the companies focus on their existing market, there would never be anything new.
Researchers do best when going off and doing the things they are interested in or good at. The problem then is identifying what research warrants a shift over to Development effort to make something new. Since our corporations are often run by "business" people, they usually are not qualified to decide that. This is why they have chosen to shift the focus of R&D both to the current business.
The R&D people are the best at thinking of real applications of new ideas. They don't make the decisions though - and they're often not the best communicators, so they aren't as persuasive as they could be. I have noticed that at least one Exxon executive started as a chemist. GM tends to promote a lot from within (and not just MBAs). Get management that understands what a company does (other than make money) and let the Researchers do what they understand. Yes, someone has to pay attention to the bottom line, but making the decisions based on what's technically feasible and important is far better than making them based strictly on dollars.
Too many MBAs and not enough people who know what they're doing. And the few of us left get to teach foreign workers our skills because they're cheaper (short term) than us. Of course the US is in danger of falling behind. But what we haven't taught anyone else is how to innovate. That right brained thinking that comes from a crappy US education. We'll get back to that right after we can't get easy profits doing the same old thing any more. Look out the rest of you, I sense some real innovation coming.... From the US.
Fuel cells would be great replacements for non-rechargable batterys, but not rechargables. Think about it. You hate to recharge your laptop, but you'll hate it more if you have to pay for fuel. You pay for electricity, but you don't usually think about it. You also don't pay for it if you charge your laptop at work. Yes, one way or the other we all pay for it - I'm talking about noticing it.
So what you really want is 2 functions in the base class that are called at entry and exit from the corresponding function in the subclass. This is similar in behavior to constructors isn't it? Only is applied to other functions and again on exit from those functions. You just need a compiler that knows to add a call to the "aspects" at the start/end of overloaded functions if the aspect exists. Putting them in a base class definition shouldn't make it too hard to follow the code.
Let's not forget that they'll have to stop everything while that whole ball of mud is written to disk (periodically). You can't restore from an incremental backup unless your starting point is actually a snapshot in time.
I've read a number of articles at that site linked from/. stories and none of them were about really solid scientific findings. In this case, these guys are probably advertising a weak concept to get grant money. If not, they would probably keep quiet and go for patents or at least publish in a respectable journal.
The ink makers need to start selling printers too. Market them as lower TCO due to the cheaper ink. Then again, it's not just about maximizing ink prices, it's about owning the market - then raising ink prices.
If they won't tell anyone, then they shouldn't be looking in the first place. Certainly not with my tax dollars anyway. Obviously someone thinks they're special. I'd like the last few days off work too.
I have a standing policy. No pay, no work. if we blow a deadline it is probably because somebody made an unreasonable schedule, or SW gets blamed for someone elses slip (think hardware). If I feel I've slacked a little or there really is an unusual situation I'll stay, but last minute OT pressure is usually just due to unrealistic scheduling. If you make a stand on this, you'll find they cannot defend their position. Then perhaps you can save the day for free and be appreciated rather than have it be expected (if you're really concerned about that raise later).
Many projects under GPL have a large number of contributing authors. If someone violates the GPL in such a case there may not be anyone with the money to enforce it in court. The courts also seem to like cases where you can show damages which would be hard to do for many projects. GPL works in theory, but how will enforcement work in practice for smaller projects without commercial backing?
1) All e-commerce will move to the other 12 states.
2) The 38 states will then complain, and we'll end up with a new federal tax.
3) The states will lose because the feds will take a cut (or all, because only they know how best to distribute it).
4) Once a precedent is established they'll go for a national sales tax on everything. Never mind the legality of such a tax.
5) The states will lose revenue and control.
Greedy people keep shooting themselves in the foot. Happens every day.
1) I can't wait any more.
2) I still support the underdog.
3) I want SSE2.
4) I want 64bit even though Mr. Ruinz doesn't seem to think people want such things.
5) No need to wait for MS, I've been planning to switch if I could ever get a good $^&(# 'puter.
Dual Opterons at 2GHz with AGP8x and I'm there. BTW that better NOT be 2000+
As for Athlon64, It better be 90nm and have dual core by September.
In the article, they make it sound as if the feds figured out everything about the worm. If they knew how it was supposed to recieve instructions, why not "upgrade" it to give them information about its creator. And after the arrest, command it to delete itself. It sounds like it's still out there at the end of the article. Or perhaps they do know how to control it and they like it that way:-)
The guys doing the Hammer port have been talking to no end about this. Have a look over at www.x86-64.org mailing list archives. There's lots of talk about banning trampolines and such. It sounds like Linux on Hammer will not allow executable stack, but since I'm only an occasional lurker there I can't say for sure. Now if only I could buy one...
Slashdot Mirror
I've been wanting to try that same thing for some time now. Ball and spring source files. I even thought Linux would be more interesting than any of my projects. You've proved all that correct! I was hoping to ray trace it though and allow grabbing and stretching/pulling via mouse. If you can output a text file for the connectivity I can do RT quickly, the challenge was going to be parsing everything. I figured this could help with code structuring - you want low connectivity for clean code. Or at least loosely connected small tangles. I suspect this would show most people that their code is more of a mess than they realize.
I still wish I got my "Certified Rocket Scientist" certificate when I was working at Hughes. No one had a fresh copy to put my name on :-)
I always thought the "information highway" analogy was most accurate. The net is simply a way to get your data from here to there. This makes it clear that the only way to make money from the net is in construction/materials (think Cisco) but like road construction I can pay anyone that knows how to do that. Or put up a toll booth, bu notice how many real roads don't have em because people take other routes. It's like infrastructure - everyone uses it, but it's not a business in itself. Get a clue, provide something of value and people will give you money for it. And remember, what used to be of value may not be today.
The Write brothers. They weren't in isolation - they corresponded with other "crackpots" while well respected people said it was impossible. Never mind the Politics that took place afterward. Langley, PTO, Smithsonian, etc...
Andrew Wiles. Proof of FLT is a correlary to ground breaking work done in relative isolation.
There are lots of cases where small groups or individuals made significant advances. Sometimes they happen to be employed by big companies (IC at TI for example) but they are still small groups or an individual. Only someone backed by big organizations would say advances tend to come from same.
I'd argue that only small groups or individuals can make significant breakthroughs. Any large effort will be screwed up by politics. This is the reason we have start-ups, and the CATS prize.
Perhap after strengthening it. First thing is to deploy more of them. Suppose you start shipping cargo up the elevator... Alternative methods to get payloads to space are so expensive in comparison that support for them dries up. If something happens to the elevator, there would be no way to build a new one. Naturally there will always be some need for rockets, but suppose the shuttle program stops and you need people in the LEO part of deployment of a first elevator? Better make at least 2 and keep them separated.
One of the first things they said in economics class was to make your graph start at zero to prevent this kind of thing. Since econ is required for MBAs even more than EEs (me) and companies always use this practice, it has been a valuable lesson to me. Look at the day charts for DJIA or NASD, they always appear spectacular with one of 4 descriptions:
1) Big Gain
2) Big Loss
3) Early gain followed by a retreat
4) Early decline and then recovery
Always a news-worthy day based on the chart because it covers the full range - never mind that we scaled it that way on purpose.
To periodically destroy documents relating to developments they patented and then sued others for infringing. It'd be cool if they could actually destroy those patents too :-)
And the fact that they went into JEDEC meetings to help define an open standard and then patented things being developed there. The RAMBUS saga is about abuse of the processes used to develop new standards. Rambus has yet to be properly dealt with for that, and that make an update on their case "News for Nerds" as much as anything.
Researchers do best when going off and doing the things they are interested in or good at. The problem then is identifying what research warrants a shift over to Development effort to make something new. Since our corporations are often run by "business" people, they usually are not qualified to decide that. This is why they have chosen to shift the focus of R&D both to the current business.
The R&D people are the best at thinking of real applications of new ideas. They don't make the decisions though - and they're often not the best communicators, so they aren't as persuasive as they could be. I have noticed that at least one Exxon executive started as a chemist. GM tends to promote a lot from within (and not just MBAs). Get management that understands what a company does (other than make money) and let the Researchers do what they understand. Yes, someone has to pay attention to the bottom line, but making the decisions based on what's technically feasible and important is far better than making them based strictly on dollars.
Too many MBAs and not enough people who know what they're doing. And the few of us left get to teach foreign workers our skills because they're cheaper (short term) than us. Of course the US is in danger of falling behind. But what we haven't taught anyone else is how to innovate. That right brained thinking that comes from a crappy US education. We'll get back to that right after we can't get easy profits doing the same old thing any more. Look out the rest of you, I sense some real innovation coming.... From the US.
Fuel cells would be great replacements for non-rechargable batterys, but not rechargables. Think about it. You hate to recharge your laptop, but you'll hate it more if you have to pay for fuel. You pay for electricity, but you don't usually think about it. You also don't pay for it if you charge your laptop at work. Yes, one way or the other we all pay for it - I'm talking about noticing it.
So what you really want is 2 functions in the base class that are called at entry and exit from the corresponding function in the subclass. This is similar in behavior to constructors isn't it? Only is applied to other functions and again on exit from those functions. You just need a compiler that knows to add a call to the "aspects" at the start/end of overloaded functions if the aspect exists. Putting them in a base class definition shouldn't make it too hard to follow the code.
Let's not forget that they'll have to stop everything while that whole ball of mud is written to disk (periodically). You can't restore from an incremental backup unless your starting point is actually a snapshot in time.
1) FUD ...
2)
3) We control everything
The ink makers need to start selling printers too. Market them as lower TCO due to the cheaper ink. Then again, it's not just about maximizing ink prices, it's about owning the market - then raising ink prices.
Someone must have accidentally moded you up instead of down. Your comment is sad and off-topic.
If they won't tell anyone, then they shouldn't be looking in the first place. Certainly not with my tax dollars anyway. Obviously someone thinks they're special. I'd like the last few days off work too.
That's probably why the efficiency is low :-)
I have a standing policy. No pay, no work. if we blow a deadline it is probably because somebody made an unreasonable schedule, or SW gets blamed for someone elses slip (think hardware). If I feel I've slacked a little or there really is an unusual situation I'll stay, but last minute OT pressure is usually just due to unrealistic scheduling. If you make a stand on this, you'll find they cannot defend their position. Then perhaps you can save the day for free and be appreciated rather than have it be expected (if you're really concerned about that raise later).
Many projects under GPL have a large number of contributing authors. If someone violates the GPL in such a case there may not be anyone with the money to enforce it in court. The courts also seem to like cases where you can show damages which would be hard to do for many projects. GPL works in theory, but how will enforcement work in practice for smaller projects without commercial backing?
2) GIF patent expires when? 2003? 4?
3) GIF probably predates it and is more specific, and so no broad patent could be valid.
And yes, Morse was designed to compress because of the inefficiency of the telegraph.
1) All e-commerce will move to the other 12 states.
2) The 38 states will then complain, and we'll end up with a new federal tax.
3) The states will lose because the feds will take a cut (or all, because only they know how best to distribute it).
4) Once a precedent is established they'll go for a national sales tax on everything. Never mind the legality of such a tax.
5) The states will lose revenue and control.
Greedy people keep shooting themselves in the foot. Happens every day.
2) I still support the underdog.
3) I want SSE2.
4) I want 64bit even though Mr. Ruinz doesn't seem to think people want such things.
5) No need to wait for MS, I've been planning to switch if I could ever get a good $^&(# 'puter.
Dual Opterons at 2GHz with AGP8x and I'm there. BTW that better NOT be 2000+
As for Athlon64, It better be 90nm and have dual core by September.
Dammit.
In the article, they make it sound as if the feds figured out everything about the worm. If they knew how it was supposed to recieve instructions, why not "upgrade" it to give them information about its creator. And after the arrest, command it to delete itself. It sounds like it's still out there at the end of the article. Or perhaps they do know how to control it and they like it that way :-)
The guys doing the Hammer port have been talking to no end about this. Have a look over at www.x86-64.org mailing list archives. There's lots of talk about banning trampolines and such. It sounds like Linux on Hammer will not allow executable stack, but since I'm only an occasional lurker there I can't say for sure. Now if only I could buy one...