It is theorized to do the least amount of damage? To what? To the earth? Or to the people living on it?
It sure helps in getting a relatively wealthy society quickly, but I would not call anything the current world does "the least amount of damage". Quite the opposite actually.
You are confusing physical sector size with cluster size. May file systems are already addressing data in larger blocks. 4096 is very commonly used. They are generally multiples of 512 which is the physical sector size; so that its is easy to calculate the physical sector that needs to be changed when you know the logical.
Or more precisely, they are powers of two equal to or higher than 512. Maybe you can do things like having a cluster size of 1536 bytes, but it would not be a system that I have encountered in the wild.
Bollocks, a botnet costs them way more than they could deliver because of colocation. One of the things mostly hit by botnets are mail servers and many ISP's run a large set of those. What about the number of MB that these botnets generate? In the end, data capacity is not free.
At this point we should probably be harvesting DNA from threatened species (from enough donors to form a not-completely-terrible breeding population) and storing it away somewhere.
I don't see the point. The main reasons that we don't have these animals any more is because we've destroyed their habitat. As long as we are not restoring or replacing those habitats, what use is it to resurrect the animals that used to live in it? I mean, do we want to have a zoo that keeps all the extinct animals? For what reason?
Yes, that in practice is how I work as well. There are times that I'm in the mood for coding and things get done quickly. The other times I am creating (sometimes bad) designs, documenting, handling email, writing test cases (actually, no, I'm in the position I can have this done by other persons) - the other 80% of the job. I've had to complete a coding job in about 3 weeks that required continuous coding. Fortunately I had a good design in my head and energy left to do it, but I could only pull that off once or twice a year, it just takes too much focus
First I actively tried to have a single project at a time. After a while I noticed that that is counter-productive. Nowadays I tend to go for 2 to 3. If anywhere possible one of them should be a pet-project, one that I really like. Such a project sounds hard to get, but most of the time you can do something to enable better productivity later on, such as refining project management. That said, I'm trying to be in R&D and I am in standardization - hard requirements for job satisfaction for me.
And - I'm sorry to say - scrolling isn't smooth, even on my recent computer. Hardware accelerated scrolling certainly makes sense. Maybe more buffering could do the same thing, but FF3.5 is not as smooth as it should be. The android phone I tried today easily beat it.
4) Utilize Powerful Conservative Terms: using powerful new conservative terms to capture better the original intent;[4] Defective translations use the word "comrade" three times as often as "volunteer"; similarly, updating words that have a change in meaning, such as "word", "peace", and "miracle". 5) Combat Harmful Addiction: combating addiction[5] by using modern terms for it, such as "gamble" rather than "cast lots";[6] using modern political terms, such as "register" rather than "enroll" for the census
And that they call *NOT* altering the word of god. I would call that liberal translation. Not that it matters, they haven't decided on a base version anyway - they prefer the King James Bible - with some additional Greek & Hebrew sources added where the KJB does not suit them.
The problem with the ION chipset imho is not its capabilities but the high power use on standby. The relatively high power use when playing back 1080p is OK with me - it's delivering a lot back to the user. High power use in 3D? No problem. High power use that sucks my battery dry when doing internet or word... No thanks.
Weight price and battery life. But as NetBooks and Laptops are a category there will always be in-betweens. Or are you the type that goes with "with us or against us?"
They ran it with an application designed to suck battery life out of it (apparently including the 3D - not something you would use on the road). They actually mentioned in the article that it would very probably run 5 hours. Moderators, first read the article before moderating.
What are the chances that.NET and C# are in the SAME job listing? Pretty high I guess. So adding them up makes no sense whatsoever. The only way to get to the exact number is to count the number of articles that state either.NET (which automatically includes ASP.NET) and/or C# and compare that with java requirements. Note that even that number may not make too much sense - there's a lot of Java recruitement done through other means than Monster.com listings - there is no real meaningfull way of comparing their popularity.
Not that it matter too much: I don't even want for Java to become more popular if that means that any one feature gets added once there is a "market demand" for it. IMHO complexity is the main reason NOT to choose a programming language; the feature listings of the D language makes my hairs stand up straight.
The truth is that any platform can be fucked up to the point that that happens. It's not the language, it's the horrible people that do things like rewrite parts of the runtime. I can also still see a lot of applications with hard coded paths using Windows notation.
Most of the applications that run on a specific VM run just fine on any newer platform anyway. It's just that the testing has been performed on one specific platform which is then included just to be sure. This is a dumb thing since any security or bug won't be fixed by (automatic) updates.
I've not seen any Java release that mucks up so badly that a significant code rewrite is necessary, and most applications will run without any problems. From 1.4 to 1.5/1.6 and the most notible difference is the sudden speed increase.
Of course, with Java you have at least the possibility to install various versions of the runtime and make sure that only one is used for an application. It might be possible with.NET, but I doubt it would be easy.
Of course you can mess up, but I haven't had a single of my many applications have serious problems running on any platform. Of course, if you use third party libs with native calls, all bets are off. But that would be the case with any language - it's simply unavoidable.
BTW, I'm also using Java Card. You might be interested to know that there are billions of Java Card SIM's, bank cards and other identity documents out there. There once was a Windows card and now a.NET card, but I don't see any market penetration by either one of them.
I don't have a single guy in our SE department that isn't at peace with his life. Out of 20 or so guys. The 10 that are slightly more twitchy are the much better paid externals.
True enough, but I know way to many women in the business that are just too nice or not driven enough. I think that being emotional is fine, as long as you are emotional for the right reasons. It's only when it gets personal that emotions really start being in the way. And don't forget that you don't do well in any business setting if you never get angry about something. That said, maybe I'm just using the dark side of the force too much:)
"Well those are exceptions to the theory. People with a functioning brain that don't have an illness that destroys memory or limits thinking should be able to be intelligent at least at one thing if not more."
Not really, they were the outer limits. There are plenty people that don't have any particular amount of intelligence among them. There are many that just have enough intelligence to get by.
As for your argument that those who are intelligent should use their gift: I fully agree that they should help others. Which is why I am part of a political party that tries to accomplish said goal.
What about chronic addicts? What about persons that suffer from Down syndrome? What about people with Alzheimer?
I'm rather compelled to live in the world you are living in, where each and every person has something of intelligence about them. Unfortunately I think it requires wearing pink colored glasses.
Not everybody's brain has evolved in such a way that it is suitable to solve problems.
I once spent some 20 minutes to explain that 1) yes you can copy when using a scanner and YES 2) you do require a printer as well. Glad to know that the guy was just culturally challenged.
Hmm, I don't count cached results or a running count of accesses as state of an object.
The first one is just an optimization that does not tell anything of the actual state of the object - clear the cache and the state is the same.
The second one is a clear cut case of meta-state. The state of the use of the object, not of the object itself.
And yes, of course you may use a getter to do calculations to reveal the state of an object. If the getter however starts to perform a calculation that could take a lot of time, or if the calculation is not directly related to the state of the object, you'd be better off using calculateRisk() than getRisk()...
OK, OK, but you'll agree with me that calculateRisk() would be a much better name for the method. What if the calculation takes lots of time? A getRisk() would not convey that possible meaning to me. It would easily be skipped when looking through the code for easy optimizations (and e.g. other persons could call a getter twice instead of saving the result in a local variable, for instance). So why not use calculateRisk() instead of getRisk()? Better safe than sorry.
As for the state, I think we are in full agreement here.
Investment.getRisk() looks too much like a getter method to me, so it might confuse others as well. I hate it when "getters" actually do meaningful calculation (outside just relaying state of the object) or worse, change state. I saw a method called getData() that actually performed an HTTP request at my company. That object now has "deprecated" written all over it.
Sorry, but even though the initial support was different, there are a lot of similarities. The US took the lead in attacking those countries, mainly for its own benefit. The US did not have a good (if any) plan what to do after the initial "victory". Both countries are important for oil and gas reserves (Afghan pipeline). In both countries the US had a very ruthless way of handling insurgents, making sure that most of the population is now anti US. Both countries had little to nothing to do (at least directly) with what happened on 9-11 - but were blamed for it anyway.
In the mean time the situations in both countries seems worse (in most regions) than before the war. And that while the wars seriously hurt the states that have send troops, both in money and in casualties. If you imagine the state they were in before they were freed, that's quite an accomplishment. At least in Iraq there seems to be some hope for improvement. In Afghanistan the NL troops have been trying a lot of things to get support of the locals, but it seems that even they are not as welcome as one would expect. Afghanistan seems a lost cause for me, and it is hard to blame countries from wanting to retreat.
Slashdot Mirror
It is theorized to do the least amount of damage? To what? To the earth? Or to the people living on it?
It sure helps in getting a relatively wealthy society quickly, but I would not call anything the current world does "the least amount of damage". Quite the opposite actually.
You are confusing physical sector size with cluster size. May file systems are already addressing data in larger blocks. 4096 is very commonly used. They are generally multiples of 512 which is the physical sector size; so that its is easy to calculate the physical sector that needs to be changed when you know the logical.
Or more precisely, they are powers of two equal to or higher than 512. Maybe you can do things like having a cluster size of 1536 bytes, but it would not be a system that I have encountered in the wild.
Bollocks, a botnet costs them way more than they could deliver because of colocation. One of the things mostly hit by botnets are mail servers and many ISP's run a large set of those. What about the number of MB that these botnets generate? In the end, data capacity is not free.
At this point we should probably be harvesting DNA from threatened species (from enough donors to form a not-completely-terrible breeding population) and storing it away somewhere.
I don't see the point. The main reasons that we don't have these animals any more is because we've destroyed their habitat. As long as we are not restoring or replacing those habitats, what use is it to resurrect the animals that used to live in it? I mean, do we want to have a zoo that keeps all the extinct animals? For what reason?
Yes, that in practice is how I work as well. There are times that I'm in the mood for coding and things get done quickly. The other times I am creating (sometimes bad) designs, documenting, handling email, writing test cases (actually, no, I'm in the position I can have this done by other persons) - the other 80% of the job. I've had to complete a coding job in about 3 weeks that required continuous coding. Fortunately I had a good design in my head and energy left to do it, but I could only pull that off once or twice a year, it just takes too much focus
First I actively tried to have a single project at a time. After a while I noticed that that is counter-productive. Nowadays I tend to go for 2 to 3. If anywhere possible one of them should be a pet-project, one that I really like. Such a project sounds hard to get, but most of the time you can do something to enable better productivity later on, such as refining project management. That said, I'm trying to be in R&D and I am in standardization - hard requirements for job satisfaction for me.
And - I'm sorry to say - scrolling isn't smooth, even on my recent computer. Hardware accelerated scrolling certainly makes sense. Maybe more buffering could do the same thing, but FF3.5 is not as smooth as it should be. The android phone I tried today easily beat it.
Ooh, that's brilliant. Lets just take 4) and 5)
4) Utilize Powerful Conservative Terms: using powerful new conservative terms to capture better the original intent;[4] Defective translations use the word "comrade" three times as often as "volunteer"; similarly, updating words that have a change in meaning, such as "word", "peace", and "miracle".
5) Combat Harmful Addiction: combating addiction[5] by using modern terms for it, such as "gamble" rather than "cast lots";[6] using modern political terms, such as "register" rather than "enroll" for the census
And that they call *NOT* altering the word of god. I would call that liberal translation. Not that it matters, they haven't decided on a base version anyway - they prefer the King James Bible - with some additional Greek & Hebrew sources added where the KJB does not suit them.
The problem with the ION chipset imho is not its capabilities but the high power use on standby. The relatively high power use when playing back 1080p is OK with me - it's delivering a lot back to the user. High power use in 3D? No problem. High power use that sucks my battery dry when doing internet or word... No thanks.
Weight price and battery life. But as NetBooks and Laptops are a category there will always be in-betweens. Or are you the type that goes with "with us or against us?"
They ran it with an application designed to suck battery life out of it (apparently including the 3D - not something you would use on the road). They actually mentioned in the article that it would very probably run 5 hours. Moderators, first read the article before moderating.
What are the chances that .NET and C# are in the SAME job listing? Pretty high I guess. So adding them up makes no sense whatsoever. The only way to get to the exact number is to count the number of articles that state either .NET (which automatically includes ASP.NET) and/or C# and compare that with java requirements. Note that even that number may not make too much sense - there's a lot of Java recruitement done through other means than Monster.com listings - there is no real meaningfull way of comparing their popularity.
Not that it matter too much: I don't even want for Java to become more popular if that means that any one feature gets added once there is a "market demand" for it. IMHO complexity is the main reason NOT to choose a programming language; the feature listings of the D language makes my hairs stand up straight.
The truth is that any platform can be fucked up to the point that that happens. It's not the language, it's the horrible people that do things like rewrite parts of the runtime. I can also still see a lot of applications with hard coded paths using Windows notation.
Most of the applications that run on a specific VM run just fine on any newer platform anyway. It's just that the testing has been performed on one specific platform which is then included just to be sure. This is a dumb thing since any security or bug won't be fixed by (automatic) updates.
I've not seen any Java release that mucks up so badly that a significant code rewrite is necessary, and most applications will run without any problems. From 1.4 to 1.5/1.6 and the most notible difference is the sudden speed increase.
Of course, with Java you have at least the possibility to install various versions of the runtime and make sure that only one is used for an application. It might be possible with .NET, but I doubt it would be easy.
Of course you can mess up, but I haven't had a single of my many applications have serious problems running on any platform. Of course, if you use third party libs with native calls, all bets are off. But that would be the case with any language - it's simply unavoidable.
BTW, I'm also using Java Card. You might be interested to know that there are billions of Java Card SIM's, bank cards and other identity documents out there. There once was a Windows card and now a .NET card, but I don't see any market penetration by either one of them.
I don't have a single guy in our SE department that isn't at peace with his life. Out of 20 or so guys. The 10 that are slightly more twitchy are the much better paid externals.
That's just got to say something.
True enough, but I know way to many women in the business that are just too nice or not driven enough. I think that being emotional is fine, as long as you are emotional for the right reasons. It's only when it gets personal that emotions really start being in the way. And don't forget that you don't do well in any business setting if you never get angry about something. That said, maybe I'm just using the dark side of the force too much :)
Internationalizatio?
Gosh, yes, a few meters added to the current sea levels sounds like brilliant idea. Count me in (a few meters of sea water).
"Well those are exceptions to the theory. People with a functioning brain that don't have an illness that destroys memory or limits thinking should be able to be intelligent at least at one thing if not more."
Not really, they were the outer limits. There are plenty people that don't have any particular amount of intelligence among them. There are many that just have enough intelligence to get by.
As for your argument that those who are intelligent should use their gift: I fully agree that they should help others. Which is why I am part of a political party that tries to accomplish said goal.
What about chronic addicts? What about persons that suffer from Down syndrome? What about people with Alzheimer?
I'm rather compelled to live in the world you are living in, where each and every person has something of intelligence about them. Unfortunately I think it requires wearing pink colored glasses.
Not everybody's brain has evolved in such a way that it is suitable to solve problems.
I once spent some 20 minutes to explain that 1) yes you can copy when using a scanner and YES 2) you do require a printer as well. Glad to know that the guy was just culturally challenged.
Hmm, I don't count cached results or a running count of accesses as state of an object.
The first one is just an optimization that does not tell anything of the actual state of the object - clear the cache and the state is the same.
The second one is a clear cut case of meta-state. The state of the use of the object, not of the object itself.
And yes, of course you may use a getter to do calculations to reveal the state of an object. If the getter however starts to perform a calculation that could take a lot of time, or if the calculation is not directly related to the state of the object, you'd be better off using calculateRisk() than getRisk()...
OK, OK, but you'll agree with me that calculateRisk() would be a much better name for the method. What if the calculation takes lots of time? A getRisk() would not convey that possible meaning to me. It would easily be skipped when looking through the code for easy optimizations (and e.g. other persons could call a getter twice instead of saving the result in a local variable, for instance). So why not use calculateRisk() instead of getRisk()? Better safe than sorry.
As for the state, I think we are in full agreement here.
Investment.getRisk() looks too much like a getter method to me, so it might confuse others as well. I hate it when "getters" actually do meaningful calculation (outside just relaying state of the object) or worse, change state. I saw a method called getData() that actually performed an HTTP request at my company. That object now has "deprecated" written all over it.
So what you're saying is that we could create 2 Grand Marquis if we accelerated 2 mini-Coopers to high enough speeds?
Sorry, but even though the initial support was different, there are a lot of similarities. The US took the lead in attacking those countries, mainly for its own benefit. The US did not have a good (if any) plan what to do after the initial "victory". Both countries are important for oil and gas reserves (Afghan pipeline). In both countries the US had a very ruthless way of handling insurgents, making sure that most of the population is now anti US. Both countries had little to nothing to do (at least directly) with what happened on 9-11 - but were blamed for it anyway.
In the mean time the situations in both countries seems worse (in most regions) than before the war. And that while the wars seriously hurt the states that have send troops, both in money and in casualties. If you imagine the state they were in before they were freed, that's quite an accomplishment. At least in Iraq there seems to be some hope for improvement. In Afghanistan the NL troops have been trying a lot of things to get support of the locals, but it seems that even they are not as welcome as one would expect. Afghanistan seems a lost cause for me, and it is hard to blame countries from wanting to retreat.