One thing I'd worry about though is how one defines what is pornography and what isn't.
That's exactly it right there. Not only won't other countries have to care about this, but it's likely that this law would be unconstitutional in the US. There's something called the Miller Test which regulates what can be deemed "obscene" (in terms of US laws: obscene==sex). The only speech or expressions which can be deemed obscene (and therefore not protected by the first ammendment) are those which fail all of the following tests:
Whether the average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,
Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable state law,
Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
From the wikipedia article: For legal scholars, several issues are important. One is that the test allows for community standards rather than a national standard. What offends the average person in Tulsa, Oklahoma may differ from what offends the average person in San Francisco. The relevant community, however, is not defined. So I don't see how you could possibly force even US porn sites to classify themselves as.xxx when they're regulated by local community standards not federal standards.
Plus, knowing the internet... there are gonna be ways around it anyway.
I have to say, I'm suprised and impressed... a $1.2M grant to harden open source software? Thanks all seeing orwellian eyeball. I don't recall slashdot posting anything about the original grant but here's a link from the posted article to another about the funding.
The data is meant to help secure open-source software, which is increasingly used in critical systems, analysts said. Programmers working on the Linux operating system, Apache Web server, BIND Internet infrastructure software and Firefox browser, for example, will be able to fix security vulnerabilities flagged by the system before their code becomes part of a released application or operating system.
I'll tell you what I'm fscking sick of. Every single book/pamphlet/magazine/website/list of job seeking suggestions threatens a job seeker with death if they don't format everything perfectly, spell everything perfectly, and make your cover letter and resume look like a shining diamond. Yet the job postings I see on every single job site, whether it's craigslist or somewhere really formal, are pieces of shit.
They're spelled incorrectly, they have horrible grammar. There are inconsistencies with the technology (four years of something that has only existed for 2). They're inconsistent with how they want you to contact them: the company wants a direct email, the job site wants you to go through their website, and the recruiter wants you to go through them.
I swear to god, companies need to get their shit together if they expect the same from us. When I'm looking for a job, that's really number one in my book, is the company even focused enough to create a coherent job post. Because there are plenty that are shit, and I'm just going to look right past you.
I like the GPL and use it for software, but it's just not right for things like text. For instance, I can use my GPL-given right to revise and extend Richard Stallman's text to read:
And from the/. article summary: "He suggests instead using the GPL for creative works." RMS would never recommend that, there exists the GNU Free Documentation License for documents, and this is most likely what RMS would recommend.
And in fact, actually reading the article gives you this RMS quote: "However, [the GPL's] requirements are inconvenient for works that one might want to print and publish in a book, so I don't recommend using it for manuals, or for novels." I too believe Stallman is misguided in this particular instance, but don't put words in his mouth, he has a hard enough time getting his foot in there.
I absolutely hate DRM and believe that the DMCA should be repealed. I also believe there should be laws stating that no one should be able to place digital locks on material that a user has certain rights to which the locks curtail.
However, I really don't know about this change in the GPL. I thought one of the things the GPL wanted to avoid were the extra clauses about what you could and couldn't use the software for. I seem to remember people who would write "free" software with the license almost identical to the GPL but then add things like "No one in the US Military is allowed to use this software." I was under the impression that people who truly wanted Free and Open Source Software to prevail were against these kinds of restrictions...
A and men. Slashdotters use phrases like "groupthink," "Joe Six-Pack" and the like, usually pretending that they aren't insulting people. Using the word "groupthink" in this context implies that people who like Firefly only feel that way because "everyone" on the Interweb says it's super cool.
I feel the exact same way, it's time people stopped criticising things based on how many people like it. Judge it based on its own qualities.
Me, I'm one of those oddities who liked the show from the first episode aired despite Fox showing episodes out of order.
I was just the opposite, I had never watched an episode of Firefly during its original run. I never saw Serenity in the theatre. I caught the end of one episode and two others when they were being replayed on SciFi, and I was immediately hooked. I was just starting to get into the hype when the movie came out because there seemed to be so many people around me who liked this show. I just recently rented and watched the first 3 episodes on DVD, and within a week bought the entire box set. I have not been disappointed with a single episode. I know a purchase of Serenity is in my future.
I'll admin that I'm a huge geek, but even my brother watched and liked Firefly. Even his girlfriend (who was glued to the tv during the golden globes, reads 'People' and other celebrity gossip magazines constantly, and hates computers) really likes Firefly. The characters are just written so well, that you really believe that the actors are their characters.
Well, enough gushing from me, just my opinion after all. If you haven't seen any Firefly or Serenity, just do yourself a favor and watch the first three episodes. You can rent them for cheap at a video store.
Holy crap, you're a moron. I'm sorry but you really are. Ithaca Hours? Are you seriously basing your views of upstate New York on Ithaca? Home to both Ithaca College and Cornell University (talk about liberal). I grew up in Schenectady and have actually traveled to different parts of the state (including Ithaca) and you might be interested to find out that the rest of upstate is not like Ithaca at all. Try reading the Politics section of the Upstate New York wikipedia article.
Or just look at one of those county by county presidential election maps. Bush actually took more votes from upstate voters than Kerry. The only reason the state went for Kerry is the city.
Maybe I shouldn't be so hard on you... living in Ithaca is like living in a bubble, a very concentrated liberal bubble. And please... stop wearing those stupid 'Ithaca is Gorges' shirts. They're way over done, okay? I get it, you're ironic.
The NPR listeners are almost as bad as the people who always have to mention they don't own a TV. Look, NPR is great, ok? I'm sure it stimulates your mind. But I don't care. I like listening to alternative rock, and I have a good station for that.
I think there's a big difference. Someone who makes a point to mention that he doesn't own a TV is passing a very wide judgement on all of TV, while at the same time proclaiming that they never watch any. Whereas I'm defending a specific characterization of something I happen to like quite a bit and do listen to.
I also like listening to alternative rock, it's either WFNX for alternative rock, or WBUR for news. I feel lucky to be living in a city like Boston that has a great alternative rock station, and a great public radio station.
(Okay, and WBCN sometimes, and WBZ for traffic reports, and WEEI for sox games. Come to think of it, it's amazing how much information/entertainment I still rely on radio for.)
What's so bad about getting your word of god compared in the same sentence to The Daily Show? It sounds like you never watch The Daily Show.
I didn't mention the Daily Show at all, except for in the quote from the original review. I love the Daily Show; just as I think On Point is consistently thorough and even-handed, I think the Daily Show is the most consistently hilarious show on TV. I was exclusively addressing the reviewer's characterization of NPR playing shallow sound bites.
The book raises interesting questions, but in the end is a lightweight analysis that is better for engendering sound bites on NPR and The Daily Show than for convincing serious readers.
Hmm... sound bites on NPR... That's interesting, it sounds like you probably never listen to NPR. The breadth and depth of their coverage far surpasses any other news source I've found. For example On Point is a two hour program, each hour consists of:
An opening news debrief from a reporter or journalist on the biggest stories of the day.
An in-depth conversation on a single topic with newsmakers, thinkers and callers.
And the end of the hour segment that allows for more personal reactions to news and important issues, including radio diaries, excerpts from speeches, or special series segments.
They almost always have two or three experts in the relevant field during the discussion segment. Topics are explained and discussed with logic and level-headedness. Most of the time the topics are shown to be complicated with more sides than just the conservative vs. liberal slant you get from other news sources.
In fact I was listening when Morning Edition held a seven minute interview with the author of "Everything Bad is Good for You" back in May. I just googled for it now and it's available to listen to for free on their website: Morning Edition, May 24, 2005: Everything Bad is Good for You.
Thanks for the link, it was really cool. I "agree" with about 90% of their interpretation. They suggest that HAL made a mistake when he reported the malfunction. I however believe that he intentionally lied to put the crew in a bad situation.
Just an alternative theory.
For once I agree with the US taking a unilateral action against the world community, or at least the UN. I think laws and policies need to be informed by global actions. I also think most need to pass the global test". but just as Mr. Kerry preceded his global test statement with "I will never cede America's security to any institution or any other country", I believe that the UN should be kept away from things like root DNS servers, and any internet policy decisions. Arguments between members of the UN are much worse than any usenet flame war.
"Dr Elvin predicted the substance would lead to everything from artificial arteries to spinal parts" While his research partner Dr. Evil predicted the substance would lead to everything from miniture clones to sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads.
This is cool becasue Barry Marshall was a junior doctor who saw something he couldn't explain and decided to investigate and test it, in classic geeky fashion.
This is what religious fundamentalists/people who push intelligent design will never understand. From the article: The Nobel citation praises the doctors for their tenacity, and willingness to challenge prevailing dogmas. That's the beauty of true science, it's a quest for truth regardless of what was previously "known". If you discover something that conflicts with earlier thinking, not only are you recognized, but you're celebrated. This is because truth, not of centuries of tradition, is the motivating factor behind science.
I mean, just think about what faith is... No matter how much evidence goes against what you believe, you will still believe it anyway. Simply because it was told to you by your parents and your local wizard. It must be pretty amazing that out of the hundreds of religions all over the face of the Earth you happened to be born into the one "right" religion. Science doesn't care where you come from, or who your parents are, it's all the same search for truth. Science is much more unifying than religion.
Don't reporters do research any more? This article does nothing more than parrot what Mozilla has to say about the matter. I wonder if it would be possible for a company to completely forgo a PR departmet and just use the news media directly.
This was zdnet's first article on the recent situation, "Symantec: Mozilla browsers more vulnerable than IE". Basically, "This is what Symantec said about Mozilla". And now this article is titled, "Mozilla hits back at browser security claim". Which translates to "This is what Mozilla said back".
You could probably just take a few +5 rated comments from the first slashdot discussion about this and come up with a better article... In fact that might be a good business plan: write a script to automatically grab the highest rated comments from each story, splice them together into an article and then put on a website as original content, <msb>your articles might even be posted back to slashdot from time to time</msb>.
Eh? How exactly can you even talk about "open-source DRM"? It's one of strongest oxymorons here, DRM by definition is about restricting access, while openness is about allowing it.
Even if you mean openness of only the software itself, you can't go much farther than Microsoft Shared Source -- the "look but not touch" way. What is source worth if you can't even compile it and have it working?
What the hell are you talking about, and who the hell modded you so far up? If we were to take your point of view then I guess it's impossible for anyone to compile OpenSSH since it's about restricting access. Or for that matter any sort of encryption or authentication program.
I don't know who you are, I don't know who Maureen O'Gara is, I've never heard of Sys-Con Media. And I've never cracked open the pages of LinuxWorld. And I certainly don't give a crap about your recent blog entry/whining.
And what if I wanted to read what this horrible Maureen O'Gara has to say... oh can't do that because "I won't give any more free publicity by linking to [it]". Great, thanks, I'm happy for you that slashdot is your personal pulpit.
Am I the only one that finds it incredibly aggravating when someone submits a slashdot article that just points to their own blog because of an entry they just wrote? If you have something interesting to say then people will find it and link to it themselves. It just seems to pathetic to do it yourself.
When is 720p not 720p? well according to wikipedia:
One pound is divided into 100 pence, the singular of which is "penny". The symbol for the penny is "p".
Prior to decimalisation in 1971, each pound was divided into 240 pence - although it was usually expressed as being divided into twenty shillings, with each shilling equal to twelve pence. The symbol for the shilling was "/" or "s" - not from the first letter of the word, but rather from the Latin word solidus. The symbol for the penny was "d", from the Latin word denarius. (The solidus and denarius were Roman coins.)
After Decimal Day, the value of one penny was therefore different from its pre-decimalisation value. For the first few years after 1971, the new type of penny was commonly referred to as a "new penny". Coins for denominations of ½p, 1p, 2p, 5p, 10p and 50p all bore the name "NEW PENCE" until 1982, when the inscription changed to "ONE PENNY", "TWO PENCE", "FIVE PENCE" and so on, also, the half penny was removed from circulation.
I've gone to a few seminars on compilers and compiler optimizations and it's really amazing how well compilers do in regard to optimizations. You'll often also find that the place where you think there are bottle-necks are really not most critical part of the code. This point was discussed in "Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code" by Martin Fowler. His advice is to write code for yourself and for other coders and such. Only after you have something that works and has nice clean code should you think about optimizations. Refactoring will often make it easier to optimize later if you need it.
I also think it may be possible to defeat your compilers optimization techniques by trying to optimize yourself. I'm not a compiler person and only have had one experience to lead me to think this. But for an algorithms class we were discussing the advantages of using sentinel values when sorting data, something about being able to eliminate the check for whether the current index is past the end of the array for each iteration. Anyway we actually had to write two different implementations of this sorting algorithm in C and mine was actually slower in the sentinel value version. The only explanation I could think of was that there were some optimizations going on which relied on the loop being of a form, and changing it around caused it to loose this optimization.
Slashdot Mirror
One thing I'd worry about though is how one defines what is pornography and what isn't.
That's exactly it right there. Not only won't other countries have to care about this, but it's likely that this law would be unconstitutional in the US. There's something called the Miller Test which regulates what can be deemed "obscene" (in terms of US laws: obscene==sex). The only speech or expressions which can be deemed obscene (and therefore not protected by the first ammendment) are those which fail all of the following tests:
From the wikipedia article: For legal scholars, several issues are important. One is that the test allows for community standards rather than a national standard. What offends the average person in Tulsa, Oklahoma may differ from what offends the average person in San Francisco. The relevant community, however, is not defined. So I don't see how you could possibly force even US porn sites to classify themselves as .xxx when they're regulated by local community standards not federal standards.
Plus, knowing the internet... there are gonna be ways around it anyway.
I have to say, I'm suprised and impressed... a $1.2M grant to harden open source software? Thanks all seeing orwellian eyeball. I don't recall slashdot posting anything about the original grant but here's a link from the posted article to another about the funding.
The data is meant to help secure open-source software, which is increasingly used in critical systems, analysts said. Programmers working on the Linux operating system, Apache Web server, BIND Internet infrastructure software and Firefox browser, for example, will be able to fix security vulnerabilities flagged by the system before their code becomes part of a released application or operating system.
I'll tell you what I'm fscking sick of. Every single book/pamphlet/magazine/website/list of job seeking suggestions threatens a job seeker with death if they don't format everything perfectly, spell everything perfectly, and make your cover letter and resume look like a shining diamond. Yet the job postings I see on every single job site, whether it's craigslist or somewhere really formal, are pieces of shit.
They're spelled incorrectly, they have horrible grammar. There are inconsistencies with the technology (four years of something that has only existed for 2). They're inconsistent with how they want you to contact them: the company wants a direct email, the job site wants you to go through their website, and the recruiter wants you to go through them.
I swear to god, companies need to get their shit together if they expect the same from us. When I'm looking for a job, that's really number one in my book, is the company even focused enough to create a coherent job post. Because there are plenty that are shit, and I'm just going to look right past you.
I like the GPL and use it for software, but it's just not right for things like text. For instance, I can use my GPL-given right to revise and extend Richard Stallman's text to read:
And from the /. article summary: "He suggests instead using the GPL for creative works." RMS would never recommend that, there exists the GNU Free Documentation License for documents, and this is most likely what RMS would recommend.
And in fact, actually reading the article gives you this RMS quote: "However, [the GPL's] requirements are inconvenient for works that one might want to print and publish in a book, so I don't recommend using it for manuals, or for novels." I too believe Stallman is misguided in this particular instance, but don't put words in his mouth, he has a hard enough time getting his foot in there.
I absolutely hate DRM and believe that the DMCA should be repealed. I also believe there should be laws stating that no one should be able to place digital locks on material that a user has certain rights to which the locks curtail.
However, I really don't know about this change in the GPL. I thought one of the things the GPL wanted to avoid were the extra clauses about what you could and couldn't use the software for. I seem to remember people who would write "free" software with the license almost identical to the GPL but then add things like "No one in the US Military is allowed to use this software." I was under the impression that people who truly wanted Free and Open Source Software to prevail were against these kinds of restrictions...
A and men. Slashdotters use phrases like "groupthink," "Joe Six-Pack" and the like, usually pretending that they aren't insulting people. Using the word "groupthink" in this context implies that people who like Firefly only feel that way because "everyone" on the Interweb says it's super cool.
I feel the exact same way, it's time people stopped criticising things based on how many people like it. Judge it based on its own qualities.
Me, I'm one of those oddities who liked the show from the first episode aired despite Fox showing episodes out of order.
I was just the opposite, I had never watched an episode of Firefly during its original run. I never saw Serenity in the theatre. I caught the end of one episode and two others when they were being replayed on SciFi, and I was immediately hooked. I was just starting to get into the hype when the movie came out because there seemed to be so many people around me who liked this show. I just recently rented and watched the first 3 episodes on DVD, and within a week bought the entire box set. I have not been disappointed with a single episode. I know a purchase of Serenity is in my future.
I'll admin that I'm a huge geek, but even my brother watched and liked Firefly. Even his girlfriend (who was glued to the tv during the golden globes, reads 'People' and other celebrity gossip magazines constantly, and hates computers) really likes Firefly. The characters are just written so well, that you really believe that the actors are their characters.
Well, enough gushing from me, just my opinion after all. If you haven't seen any Firefly or Serenity, just do yourself a favor and watch the first three episodes. You can rent them for cheap at a video store.
Holy crap, you're a moron. I'm sorry but you really are. Ithaca Hours? Are you seriously basing your views of upstate New York on Ithaca? Home to both Ithaca College and Cornell University (talk about liberal). I grew up in Schenectady and have actually traveled to different parts of the state (including Ithaca) and you might be interested to find out that the rest of upstate is not like Ithaca at all. Try reading the Politics section of the Upstate New York wikipedia article.
Or just look at one of those county by county presidential election maps. Bush actually took more votes from upstate voters than Kerry. The only reason the state went for Kerry is the city.
Maybe I shouldn't be so hard on you... living in Ithaca is like living in a bubble, a very concentrated liberal bubble. And please... stop wearing those stupid 'Ithaca is Gorges' shirts. They're way over done, okay? I get it, you're ironic.
What if... Time cube is correct?
AJAX brings together some hot properties, Javascript, HTML/DHTML and HTML
So what you're trying to say is "AJAX brings together Javascript."
The NPR listeners are almost as bad as the people who always have to mention they don't own a TV. Look, NPR is great, ok? I'm sure it stimulates your mind. But I don't care. I like listening to alternative rock, and I have a good station for that.
I think there's a big difference. Someone who makes a point to mention that he doesn't own a TV is passing a very wide judgement on all of TV, while at the same time proclaiming that they never watch any. Whereas I'm defending a specific characterization of something I happen to like quite a bit and do listen to.
I also like listening to alternative rock, it's either WFNX for alternative rock, or WBUR for news. I feel lucky to be living in a city like Boston that has a great alternative rock station, and a great public radio station.
(Okay, and WBCN sometimes, and WBZ for traffic reports, and WEEI for sox games. Come to think of it, it's amazing how much information/entertainment I still rely on radio for.)
What's so bad about getting your word of god compared in the same sentence to The Daily Show? It sounds like you never watch The Daily Show.
I didn't mention the Daily Show at all, except for in the quote from the original review. I love the Daily Show; just as I think On Point is consistently thorough and even-handed, I think the Daily Show is the most consistently hilarious show on TV. I was exclusively addressing the reviewer's characterization of NPR playing shallow sound bites.
The book raises interesting questions, but in the end is a lightweight analysis that is better for engendering sound bites on NPR and The Daily Show than for convincing serious readers.
Hmm... sound bites on NPR... That's interesting, it sounds like you probably never listen to NPR. The breadth and depth of their coverage far surpasses any other news source I've found. For example On Point is a two hour program, each hour consists of:
They almost always have two or three experts in the relevant field during the discussion segment. Topics are explained and discussed with logic and level-headedness. Most of the time the topics are shown to be complicated with more sides than just the conservative vs. liberal slant you get from other news sources.
In fact I was listening when Morning Edition held a seven minute interview with the author of "Everything Bad is Good for You" back in May. I just googled for it now and it's available to listen to for free on their website: Morning Edition, May 24, 2005: Everything Bad is Good for You.
Thanks for the link, it was really cool. I "agree" with about 90% of their interpretation. They suggest that HAL made a mistake when he reported the malfunction. I however believe that he intentionally lied to put the crew in a bad situation. Just an alternative theory.
For once I agree with the US taking a unilateral action against the world community, or at least the UN. I think laws and policies need to be informed by global actions. I also think most need to pass the global test". but just as Mr. Kerry preceded his global test statement with "I will never cede America's security to any institution or any other country", I believe that the UN should be kept away from things like root DNS servers, and any internet policy decisions. Arguments between members of the UN are much worse than any usenet flame war.
"Dr Elvin predicted the substance would lead to everything from artificial arteries to spinal parts" While his research partner Dr. Evil predicted the substance would lead to everything from miniture clones to sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads.
This is cool becasue Barry Marshall was a junior doctor who saw something he couldn't explain and decided to investigate and test it, in classic geeky fashion.
This is what religious fundamentalists/people who push intelligent design will never understand. From the article: The Nobel citation praises the doctors for their tenacity, and willingness to challenge prevailing dogmas. That's the beauty of true science, it's a quest for truth regardless of what was previously "known". If you discover something that conflicts with earlier thinking, not only are you recognized, but you're celebrated. This is because truth, not of centuries of tradition, is the motivating factor behind science.
I mean, just think about what faith is... No matter how much evidence goes against what you believe, you will still believe it anyway. Simply because it was told to you by your parents and your local wizard. It must be pretty amazing that out of the hundreds of religions all over the face of the Earth you happened to be born into the one "right" religion. Science doesn't care where you come from, or who your parents are, it's all the same search for truth. Science is much more unifying than religion.
Don't reporters do research any more? This article does nothing more than parrot what Mozilla has to say about the matter. I wonder if it would be possible for a company to completely forgo a PR departmet and just use the news media directly.
This was zdnet's first article on the recent situation, "Symantec: Mozilla browsers more vulnerable than IE". Basically, "This is what Symantec said about Mozilla". And now this article is titled, "Mozilla hits back at browser security claim". Which translates to "This is what Mozilla said back".
You could probably just take a few +5 rated comments from the first slashdot discussion about this and come up with a better article... In fact that might be a good business plan: write a script to automatically grab the highest rated comments from each story, splice them together into an article and then put on a website as original content, <msb>your articles might even be posted back to slashdot from time to time</msb>.
(msb = mandatory slashdot bashing).Here are some recent news items about Novell's recent growth:
Open Source Community Embracing Novell's openSUSE project
Novell Fuels Linux Growth in the Data Center
Novell Making Gains in Europe on the Desktop
Novell Sees Strong Momentum in Linux Workgroup Solutions
This kind of performance seems to have gotten some investor's attenttion.
Eh? How exactly can you even talk about "open-source DRM"? It's one of strongest oxymorons here, DRM by definition is about restricting access, while openness is about allowing it. Even if you mean openness of only the software itself, you can't go much farther than Microsoft Shared Source -- the "look but not touch" way. What is source worth if you can't even compile it and have it working?
What the hell are you talking about, and who the hell modded you so far up? If we were to take your point of view then I guess it's impossible for anyone to compile OpenSSH since it's about restricting access. Or for that matter any sort of encryption or authentication program.
And just felt stupid trying to get a pirated version of a linux distro. if this pans out I will definitely give it a chance.
Well you should feel even stupider, SUSE Professional is already free. It's Enterprise which costs money.
Boffins create zombie dogs
the boffins would be happy to keep people in this state for just a few hours,
In case anyone was flummoxed by the word boffin: http://www.worldwidewords.org/topicalwords/tw-bof1 .htm explains all.
I don't know who you are, I don't know who Maureen O'Gara is, I've never heard of Sys-Con Media. And I've never cracked open the pages of LinuxWorld. And I certainly don't give a crap about your recent blog entry/whining.
And what if I wanted to read what this horrible Maureen O'Gara has to say... oh can't do that because "I won't give any more free publicity by linking to [it]". Great, thanks, I'm happy for you that slashdot is your personal pulpit.
Am I the only one that finds it incredibly aggravating when someone submits a slashdot article that just points to their own blog because of an entry they just wrote? If you have something interesting to say then people will find it and link to it themselves. It just seems to pathetic to do it yourself.
When is 720p not 720p? well according to wikipedia:
One pound is divided into 100 pence, the singular of which is "penny". The symbol for the penny is "p".
Prior to decimalisation in 1971, each pound was divided into 240 pence - although it was usually expressed as being divided into twenty shillings, with each shilling equal to twelve pence. The symbol for the shilling was "/" or "s" - not from the first letter of the word, but rather from the Latin word solidus. The symbol for the penny was "d", from the Latin word denarius. (The solidus and denarius were Roman coins.)
After Decimal Day, the value of one penny was therefore different from its pre-decimalisation value. For the first few years after 1971, the new type of penny was commonly referred to as a "new penny". Coins for denominations of ½p, 1p, 2p, 5p, 10p and 50p all bore the name "NEW PENCE" until 1982, when the inscription changed to "ONE PENNY", "TWO PENCE", "FIVE PENCE" and so on, also, the half penny was removed from circulation.
I've gone to a few seminars on compilers and compiler optimizations and it's really amazing how well compilers do in regard to optimizations. You'll often also find that the place where you think there are bottle-necks are really not most critical part of the code. This point was discussed in "Refactoring: Improving the Design of Existing Code" by Martin Fowler. His advice is to write code for yourself and for other coders and such. Only after you have something that works and has nice clean code should you think about optimizations. Refactoring will often make it easier to optimize later if you need it.
I also think it may be possible to defeat your compilers optimization techniques by trying to optimize yourself. I'm not a compiler person and only have had one experience to lead me to think this. But for an algorithms class we were discussing the advantages of using sentinel values when sorting data, something about being able to eliminate the check for whether the current index is past the end of the array for each iteration. Anyway we actually had to write two different implementations of this sorting algorithm in C and mine was actually slower in the sentinel value version. The only explanation I could think of was that there were some optimizations going on which relied on the loop being of a form, and changing it around caused it to loose this optimization.
I tried to warn you all back in august when this happened by submitting a story on Kelly's appointment, but noooo, my story was rejected...
stupid editors...