No, No, No. NT did not derive from OS/2. And it was never released as OS/2 win nt history. It was supposed to be a new foundation for OS/2 3.0, but never was. All the OS/2 subsystems were switched with Windows equivalents. You might be better off including VMS, instead of OS/2 as the NT team hailed from DEC.
In which case, we may as well use Java or Silverlight -- plenty of dynamic languages target these. My personal favorite would probably be JRuby in an applet.
Seriously? Applets? again? Have fun.
And I think he was talking about Groovy embedded inside of Java.
The article is similar to just about anything you read written by anyone : An alternating points of insight and clueless, but generally well meaning.
I'm guessing that he meant to say " when Larry Wall decided to add an object system to Perl". As the Objects weren't added until 1994. So that's when the nabbing probably occurred. Well, either that or Larry Wall has an unpublished update to Physics::Lorentz.
My previous comment was only a statement attesting to my own lack of expertise, not yours. I apologize if you got the wrong impression. You may very well be correct. My own judgment in this matter is extremely suspect.
I am also not a lawyer. I am also one who has watched too many episodes of law and order to get a feel for what a court would say in this matter versus what would advance the plot better.
That's always true, but adding the network as a point of failure you are still increasing the amount of downtime. If the power is out 10 days out of the school year, and the network is out five additional days when you have power. You're still out five additional days that you weren't out before.
Don't forget the cost of maintaining the network. In a school district setting that would probably mean a WAN connecting all of the schools and district offices together. If the network goes down.... every one has to stop working. I'm sure you are very talented and it might work for your particular district. In my area, I know the level of Network Engineers they have and I'm convinced the whole thing would blow up.
That's not the way it works in criminal court. If the evidence that proves a murder suspect committed the crime is only discovered by means of an illegal search, then the murder suspect walks free.
I disagree completely. Java is a very powerful platform that is wrong for education, but perfect for the real world. As long as you aren't doing a GUI, its not slow and clunky. But for a first programming class, its sort of tough as you have to teach object oriented programming at the same time as some procedural concepts. The main function inside of an object already confuses the heck out of people. Plus the one public class per file. Plus the whole Compile +jar requirement with all of its weirdness. And the vast array of library objects that will confuse a new commer ( array, vector, Hashmap and their ilk). I'd start with something more like groovy or python.
Contained in what? A parallel system where the majority of programs live that is infected with viruses? Its like running win98 ontop of VMware esx. Sure the host is clean, but your computer is still hosed.
It sounds too magical. You really can't expect end users to configure every apps settings ( they don't know what files/registry trees are shared by what apps). I don't know how the OS would determine the correct sandbox to run the app in. Plus, how do you tell old apps from new ones?
No, I can't your yard is surrounded by a moat of lava. I'm going to have to pick all of your flowers to defuse the lava to form a landbridge to the kingdom of the dwarf Giants, where I left my bike and my Jet.
I don't think that would work in all cases. I mean writing to the registry that wasn't actually reflected in the registry would cause that value to not be written to the registry. So the next time it started up, that value wouldn't be in the registry causing wrong behavior. Or if you were clever enough to give each program its own coppy of the registry for its writes, two applications that shared info through the registry ( a common thing amongst some windows devs) they wouldn't work correctly. If the new values were supposed to be modifying settings for the system ( perhaps to tweak windows performance or what not), Windows wouldn't read these new changes and the application wouldn't work.
But despite that line of reasoning I would be in favor of this kind of emulation for any and all apps to trap stupid crapware applications. So the UAC would be all like ( Cancel, Allow, or Fake)
I question the insight of the previous comment. Emulation wouldn't help an increase in security. If you emulate the previous lax security, then you haven't increased security. If you haven't emulated the old behavior well enough, its still bugging you with the UAC.
The really interesting thing about this is in the article where the reporter says that they've toned it down a bit , but the Microsoft spokesman only talks about programs changing to fit Vista's security model. Makes sense. Windows programs try doing all sorts of things they really shouldn't sometimes ( especially of the crapware variety).
Fascinating. Thank you for your time. Its a shame, there is so much more I could learn from you. Is there a place or organization where more people like your self gather? I would like to know more.
Reading comprehension is not your strong suite in this language. No one said it was a rational argument. The whole point I was making is that there is a difference in beliefs about this fact as evidenced by the argument.
But basically, you seem to be as unwilling to put yourself in someone else's mindset as they are. And I don't understand why, but I'd like to learn. So if you'd answer these few questions we can get started:
How old was your mother when she gave birth?
Have you read the communist manifesto and Adam Smith's Invisible hand? If so, Compare and contrast in light of 250+ years of capitalism. If not, explain why you chose not to read these seminal works.
You seem to be deeply against the idea that those with a belief in the supernatural can be reasoned with. Explain what encounters you've had have led you to this conclusion as well as your own religious background. Explain in detail how arguments amongst those with the same religious convictions are resolved and why these would be impossible to use to change their stance on an issue.
Who do you think has been the best world leader of the past 200 years? Why?
McCain largely won the nomination by attracting large numbers of independents to the primaries. Many times he lost the republican only vote, but won the primary with the help of the independents. The Republican base doesn't like McCain, but they love Palin and they don't like Obama. So, They're more voting for Palin and against Obama than for McCain. Take Rush Limbaugh the Huge conservative talk radio host. He swore he would not vote for McCain in the general election. A few other mad the same pledge during the primaries.
We are on the internet. Want to argue about that? No? Maybe that's because there isn't any doubt in anyone's mind that we are on the internet. People only ague about things that are not believed by many people. That doesn't mean that there isn't a 100% correct side and a 100% wrong side, just that there is an argument. As you said people believe stupid things, seemingly against all logic sometimes. The fact that One side says McCain (again what the heck is up with the extra 'e' you keep putting on his name?) is Bush III, the says he is not. That is called an argument.
People are complex. Deal with it. They define their own world and their own sense of right and wrong. There is a whole field of scholarly activity devoted to studding it. Its called sociology. You can understand why people believe what they believe with out yourself believing the same thing. If you want to change their mind about anything substantial, you have to understand what makes them tick. Its been my observation that many people who don't live in the united states, don't understand what makes a lot of US citizens tick. Then they judge them by their own standards. This does not mean that their are not objective standards, but they are not usually applied in this instance.
Its McCain. No trailing e. Any other republican would be down by double digits. McCain is widely hated with in his own party. He does stuff they don't like, doesn't keep his mouth shut when they want him to. He was also a victim to many nasty tricks at the hands of Bush during the 2000 primary. This is why tying him to Bush is part of the Obama strategy, because there is doubt in many peoples mind that they would pursue a similar strategy. In short its a thousand times more complex then what you and many others think. You'd sort of have to live here to understand the different points of view and why they think the way they do.
Hardly seems worth the effort of patenting it. It does seem to do a good job of doing what it does, but why on earth would you want to patent something so specific? If I were apple I'd patent the crazy touch pad keyboard thing they have on t he iphone, if they haven't already. It could work better, but its a step in the right direction where there aren't many other obvious choices with limited screen real estate.
exactly. The introductory use case of being in a strange environment and looking for food isn't very compelling. Why not just tell it where you are, ala google maps? What if you want to plan ahead for a future trip? If you can't specify where you are, you cant really do that.
1) If a site doesn't need a ssl, but wants the three letter protection they need to determine just how much that protection is worth. If its not worth the price, they probably had nothing to fear from any three letter organization.
2) I only meant legit as a synonym for a cert signed by an approved ca. Its legit cause its not signed by JoeSchmoe.org and the browsers recognize it as such. That's the only meaning I apply towards it.
Slashdot Mirror
No, No, No. NT did not derive from OS/2. And it was never released as OS/2 win nt history. It was supposed to be a new foundation for OS/2 3.0, but never was. All the OS/2 subsystems were switched with Windows equivalents. You might be better off including VMS, instead of OS/2 as the NT team hailed from DEC.
Seriously? Applets? again? Have fun.
And I think he was talking about Groovy embedded inside of Java.
The article is similar to just about anything you read written by anyone : An alternating points of insight and clueless, but generally well meaning.
Neither should Washington Mutual or Wachovia.
I'm guessing that he meant to say " when Larry Wall decided to add an object system to Perl". As the Objects weren't added until 1994. So that's when the nabbing probably occurred. Well, either that or Larry Wall has an unpublished update to Physics::Lorentz.
perl history
My previous comment was only a statement attesting to my own lack of expertise, not yours. I apologize if you got the wrong impression. You may very well be correct. My own judgment in this matter is extremely suspect.
I am also not a lawyer. I am also one who has watched too many episodes of law and order to get a feel for what a court would say in this matter versus what would advance the plot better.
That's always true, but adding the network as a point of failure you are still increasing the amount of downtime. If the power is out 10 days out of the school year, and the network is out five additional days when you have power. You're still out five additional days that you weren't out before.
Don't forget the cost of maintaining the network. In a school district setting that would probably mean a WAN connecting all of the schools and district offices together. If the network goes down.... every one has to stop working. I'm sure you are very talented and it might work for your particular district. In my area, I know the level of Network Engineers they have and I'm convinced the whole thing would blow up.
That's not the way it works in criminal court. If the evidence that proves a murder suspect committed the crime is only discovered by means of an illegal search, then the murder suspect walks free.
Well, it has enough buzz words. IMHO, Business managers and non-technical stakeholders shouldn't be writing code in any language.
I disagree completely. Java is a very powerful platform that is wrong for education, but perfect for the real world. As long as you aren't doing a GUI, its not slow and clunky. But for a first programming class, its sort of tough as you have to teach object oriented programming at the same time as some procedural concepts. The main function inside of an object already confuses the heck out of people. Plus the one public class per file. Plus the whole Compile +jar requirement with all of its weirdness. And the vast array of library objects that will confuse a new commer ( array, vector, Hashmap and their ilk). I'd start with something more like groovy or python.
Contained in what? A parallel system where the majority of programs live that is infected with viruses? Its like running win98 ontop of VMware esx. Sure the host is clean, but your computer is still hosed.
Clearly, his opinion is of no value and should receive no attention.
It sounds too magical. You really can't expect end users to configure every apps settings ( they don't know what files/registry trees are shared by what apps). I don't know how the OS would determine the correct sandbox to run the app in. Plus, how do you tell old apps from new ones?
No, I can't your yard is surrounded by a moat of lava. I'm going to have to pick all of your flowers to defuse the lava to form a landbridge to the kingdom of the dwarf Giants, where I left my bike and my Jet.
I don't think that would work in all cases. I mean writing to the registry that wasn't actually reflected in the registry would cause that value to not be written to the registry. So the next time it started up, that value wouldn't be in the registry causing wrong behavior. Or if you were clever enough to give each program its own coppy of the registry for its writes, two applications that shared info through the registry ( a common thing amongst some windows devs) they wouldn't work correctly. If the new values were supposed to be modifying settings for the system ( perhaps to tweak windows performance or what not), Windows wouldn't read these new changes and the application wouldn't work.
But despite that line of reasoning I would be in favor of this kind of emulation for any and all apps to trap stupid crapware applications. So the UAC would be all like ( Cancel, Allow, or Fake)
I question the insight of the previous comment. Emulation wouldn't help an increase in security. If you emulate the previous lax security, then you haven't increased security. If you haven't emulated the old behavior well enough, its still bugging you with the UAC.
The really interesting thing about this is in the article where the reporter says that they've toned it down a bit , but the Microsoft spokesman only talks about programs changing to fit Vista's security model. Makes sense. Windows programs try doing all sorts of things they really shouldn't sometimes ( especially of the crapware variety).
Fascinating. Thank you for your time. Its a shame, there is so much more I could learn from you. Is there a place or organization where more people like your self gather? I would like to know more.
Reading comprehension is not your strong suite in this language. No one said it was a rational argument. The whole point I was making is that there is a difference in beliefs about this fact as evidenced by the argument.
But basically, you seem to be as unwilling to put yourself in someone else's mindset as they are. And I don't understand why, but I'd like to learn. So if you'd answer these few questions we can get started:
How old was your mother when she gave birth?
Have you read the communist manifesto and Adam Smith's Invisible hand? If so, Compare and contrast in light of 250+ years of capitalism. If not, explain why you chose not to read these seminal works.
You seem to be deeply against the idea that those with a belief in the supernatural can be reasoned with. Explain what encounters you've had have led you to this conclusion as well as your own religious background. Explain in detail how arguments amongst those with the same religious convictions are resolved and why these would be impossible to use to change their stance on an issue.
Who do you think has been the best world leader of the past 200 years? Why?
How many
McCain largely won the nomination by attracting large numbers of independents to the primaries. Many times he lost the republican only vote, but won the primary with the help of the independents. The Republican base doesn't like McCain, but they love Palin and they don't like Obama. So, They're more voting for Palin and against Obama than for McCain. Take Rush Limbaugh the Huge conservative talk radio host. He swore he would not vote for McCain in the general election. A few other mad the same pledge during the primaries.
Point 1
We are on the internet. Want to argue about that? No? Maybe that's because there isn't any doubt in anyone's mind that we are on the internet. People only ague about things that are not believed by many people. That doesn't mean that there isn't a 100% correct side and a 100% wrong side, just that there is an argument. As you said people believe stupid things, seemingly against all logic sometimes. The fact that One side says McCain (again what the heck is up with the extra 'e' you keep putting on his name?) is Bush III, the says he is not. That is called an argument.
People are complex. Deal with it. They define their own world and their own sense of right and wrong. There is a whole field of scholarly activity devoted to studding it. Its called sociology. You can understand why people believe what they believe with out yourself believing the same thing. If you want to change their mind about anything substantial, you have to understand what makes them tick. Its been my observation that many people who don't live in the united states, don't understand what makes a lot of US citizens tick. Then they judge them by their own standards. This does not mean that their are not objective standards, but they are not usually applied in this instance.
Its McCain. No trailing e. Any other republican would be down by double digits. McCain is widely hated with in his own party. He does stuff they don't like, doesn't keep his mouth shut when they want him to. He was also a victim to many nasty tricks at the hands of Bush during the 2000 primary. This is why tying him to Bush is part of the Obama strategy, because there is doubt in many peoples mind that they would pursue a similar strategy. In short its a thousand times more complex then what you and many others think. You'd sort of have to live here to understand the different points of view and why they think the way they do.
Hardly seems worth the effort of patenting it. It does seem to do a good job of doing what it does, but why on earth would you want to patent something so specific? If I were apple I'd patent the crazy touch pad keyboard thing they have on t he iphone, if they haven't already. It could work better, but its a step in the right direction where there aren't many other obvious choices with limited screen real estate.
exactly. The introductory use case of being in a strange environment and looking for food isn't very compelling. Why not just tell it where you are, ala google maps? What if you want to plan ahead for a future trip? If you can't specify where you are, you cant really do that.
1) If a site doesn't need a ssl, but wants the three letter protection they need to determine just how much that protection is worth. If its not worth the price, they probably had nothing to fear from any three letter organization.
2) I only meant legit as a synonym for a cert signed by an approved ca. Its legit cause its not signed by JoeSchmoe.org and the browsers recognize it as such. That's the only meaning I apply towards it.