But I also once heard that the Dutch state publisher claims copyright on all laws it's published.
Re:Non-Tech Percent of Web Traffic from Chrome
on
Google Chrome, Day 2
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
If there were a way to punch web developers in the face through some kind of browser extension, I think these people would learn a lot faster.
I'd definitely use it.
Re:Great, just when we'd almost standardised....
on
Google Chrome, Day 2
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Are any of these browsers going to be taken up by corporations?
Firefox already is. Chrome probably needs some time.
Is this all happening because some folks can't quite accept that MS won this war 10 years ago?
You mean in the sense that Germany had won WW2 in 1941? MS has a big share, but that doesn't mean all progress suddenly stops.
Well, progress did stop for MS, but fortunately Firefox gaining market share got MS to finally update their browser to something better than that piece of crap that IE6 was.
What exactly is the need to review a program which you can download and try free of charge?
No charge doesn't mean there's no cost. It costs time and bandwidth to try it out for yourself.
Besides, more reviews means more exposure. If there are lots of very positive reviews, mainstream media are more likely to pick it up, and non-geeks might become aware of the new browser. You know, all those people who've never heard of Firefox or Opera.
Re:Non-Tech Percent of Web Traffic from Chrome
on
Google Chrome, Day 2
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Why can't servers simply return to ignoring browser identities and let browsers figure out for themselves what they can or cannot do?
Re:Non-Tech Percent of Web Traffic from Chrome
on
Google Chrome, Day 2
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Wow, you found the comic entertaining?
For a geek, he said. Presumably meaning "from a tech point of view". If that's what he meant, I agree with him.
No, it didn't have any exciting action, but it's very educational, and goes pretty deep into the tech side. That makes it entertaining for a geek.
Considering the fine print, this may mean that they reserve the right to read all data you see through their browser and that also means that they say that "we may have a snoop function" in the browser.
That's what it sounds like to me too. They get rights to whatever I post on Slashdot if I use their browser? But even more puzzling, they get rights to whatever I read?? It really looks like when you use Chrome to access a subscription site, Google suddenly an eternal license to do whatever they like with the content of that site.
To add to the parent's post, as a developer, I have found that the vast quantity of Firefox plug-ins/add-ons have been invaluable for development tasks (i.e. the web developer addon, abduction [for saving the page as an image], tamper data, etc...).
I agree, but I use Firefox specifically for webdevelopment. For private browsing I use Opera because if its greater stability and performance. (Although Firefox 3 is rumoured to be a huge improvement over Firefox 2 there.)
What's their completely new approach? All I noticed about was the screenshots of favorites (Opera / speed dial), private browsing (IE8 beta), and separate processes for tabs.
Seperate processes for tabs is exactly why I'm going to use it. Opera and Firefox grind to a halt when one tab locks up. It sounds like Chrome is designed to prevent that.
I think the scripting engine was written from scratch.
Probably the most important feature for Google. They already have some very popular javascript-intensive sites. The more efficiently and safely javascript runs in browsers, the richer they can make their web applications.
It'd have to be a generation ship, and having it travel farther would mostly mean either more stops for picking up fuel and other raw materials, or loading it with more of the same before it is launched.
True, but the crew that arrives won't be the crew that left, and that might make a huge difference. Or not. We can't be sure because nothing like that has ever been done before, but I think increasing the number of generations the journey lasts will increase a lot of uncertainties.
I may disagree with you about Faces - like EJB it seems a step too far, better to learn to write your own JSP tags and develop stuff that is clean, focused on what you need and that you understand.
I'm not really a big fan of JSP or JSF, but they're what everybody's doing these days. That's the main reason I'm recommending it. Personally I prefer a framework that separates markup from code, like Wicket. But it's hard finding a job with that.
Citation please? Or explanation? Something other than claim asserted by appeal to your personal beliefs?
How about the fact that a circle is a very special kind of ellipse? For every circle with a specific radius (or orbital speed), there's an infinite number of non-circular ellipses with the same average radius (or orbital speed).
So once you throw randomness into the mix (like gravitational interaction between multiple bodies), you're infinitely more likely to end up with a non-circular orbit than with a circular one.
I'm afraid I have no citations for you, nor am I a mathematician, but with a bit of luck, one will be along shortly to explain this with a lot more accuracy than I can. (Unless I'm totally wrong, in which case I hope he'll explain why.)
Of course finding one close to our planet could be bit harder then expected before.
I would assume that once traveling 5 lightyears is feasible, so would be 50 or 500 lightyears.
That depends a lot on what you consider feasible. At 0.1c, a 5 ly journey can be completed within a human lifetime. With 50 or 500 ly that won't work. And while communication with a 10-year lag is annoying, it's not as bad as a lag of several generations.
If we ever invent warpdrive that uses negligible fuel, 500 ly might be a breeze, but in general, orders of magnitude do matter.
well luckily the universe is big enough that we dont really need it to be a very common occurrence
We don't need anything at all in this respect. It's clear that at least one solar system among many billions of billions is suitable for life, and that's all we need.
But it is interesting to find if there might be other life out there somewhere, and if our kind of solar system is extremely rare, it's a lot less likely that we'll ever discover other life, even if it does exist.
Have you actually tried running your simulation for (simulated) four billion years? Don't you think that over a long period of time the various objects would act on one another to even their orbits out? That's the way I understood our current setup arose.
You mean accidentally reaching a circular orbit again after the orbit had already become elliptical? I think that'd be extremely unlikely. When various objects act on one another (as they invariably do), they're most likely to become more elliptical, not less.
My opinion was completely reversed, because in a world where opensource is aspiring and component based development is becoming cleaner and easier, the languages with most opensource software, such as C/C++, PHP, Perl, MySQL, etc will grow even faster.
Are you saying there is not a lot of open source Java software? Ever heard of Apache? It's all about component based open source. And so are tons of other Java projects.
Seriously, is there some shortage on Java dicumentation out there or something?
Quite the opposite. There's such a fucking huge load of Java stuff out there, that it really is hard to figure out where to start. In fact, the immense amount of Java architecture is the single largest hurdle for new Java programmers.
So here's my advice:
Do:
learn Hibernate, JDBC, OJB and database stuff in general
learn JSP or JSF, and then possibly one of the cooler web frameworks like Wicket or Tapestry. Possibly even Cocoon.
learn Spring. Also learn to avoid it, but you will encounter Spring nonetheless.
learn to use Eclipse or Netbeans. This shouldn't be too hard, because the basics of all IDEs are easy.
learn the difference between a jar, uberjar, war and ear.
learn to use an application container, like Tomcat or Jetty.
learn let maven2, maven or ant build your project and handle your dependencies
Dont:
Swing. It's not bad as such, and it is getting used, but it's just not what Java is really about these days. Java rules the web backend, not the desktop frontend.
Struts. Yes, big and popular web framework, but do yourself a favour and avoid this brain damage.
Don't try to memorize every single class. That's what api docs are for. Learn to find and use them instead.
EJB. Way overrated, and nobody really uses it anyway. EJB3 is actually not that bad, but most people just use Hibernate instead.
Don't get intimidated by J2EE. I work in J2EE environments all the time, and I have no idea what makes it so special.
Slashdot Mirror
But I also once heard that the Dutch state publisher claims copyright on all laws it's published.
If there were a way to punch web developers in the face through some kind of browser extension, I think these people would learn a lot faster.
I'd definitely use it.
Are any of these browsers going to be taken up by corporations?
Firefox already is. Chrome probably needs some time.
Is this all happening because some folks can't quite accept that MS won this war 10 years ago?
You mean in the sense that Germany had won WW2 in 1941? MS has a big share, but that doesn't mean all progress suddenly stops.
Well, progress did stop for MS, but fortunately Firefox gaining market share got MS to finally update their browser to something better than that piece of crap that IE6 was.
Did they use large chunks of other open-source browsers? If so, which ones?
Yes. Webkit mostly, and bits from Firefox apparently. Check their site for more info.
And how do they manage to get JavaScript work so lightning fast?
They're Google. They're javascript experts. Javascript is what they do. And they know what they need to make it better.
But if you want to know more, check out their source code.
What exactly is the need to review a program which you can download and try free of charge?
No charge doesn't mean there's no cost. It costs time and bandwidth to try it out for yourself.
Besides, more reviews means more exposure. If there are lots of very positive reviews, mainstream media are more likely to pick it up, and non-geeks might become aware of the new browser. You know, all those people who've never heard of Firefox or Opera.
Why can't servers simply return to ignoring browser identities and let browsers figure out for themselves what they can or cannot do?
Wow, you found the comic entertaining?
For a geek, he said. Presumably meaning "from a tech point of view". If that's what he meant, I agree with him.
No, it didn't have any exciting action, but it's very educational, and goes pretty deep into the tech side. That makes it entertaining for a geek.
1. Get and compile source
2. Release without an EULA
3. ???
4. Profit!
Except for the profit part, but yes.
But even that Google has already done for you. Chromium is the open source version of Chrome, with BSD license and no EULA.
TVery few places in the world can a company sue you just for quiting your job.
It's still an improvement compared to the time when slaves who quit their job were hunted down with dogs.
(Yes, I'm aware this joke is going to cost me karma.)
Um, which western government exactly doesn't hold elections anymore?
Some have become travesties. Does that count?
You may need to learn a new phrase that Google's lawyers already know perfectly well ... "TFA has nothing whatsoever to do with Chrome".
Here are the actual terms and conditions associated with Chrome,
Those are the terms to Chromium, not Chrome.
I think those terms and the license are the only difference between the two.
Once on-line voting and Chrome become prevalent, Google will also become The President.
Depends how many votes Diebold keeps for themselves.
If states use Chrome to order Diebold machines, then what happens?
Considering the fine print, this may mean that they reserve the right to read all data you see through their browser and that also means that they say that "we may have a snoop function" in the browser.
That's what it sounds like to me too. They get rights to whatever I post on Slashdot if I use their browser? But even more puzzling, they get rights to whatever I read ?? It really looks like when you use Chrome to access a subscription site, Google suddenly an eternal license to do whatever they like with the content of that site.
Somehow I don't think that's legal.
To add to the parent's post, as a developer, I have found that the vast quantity of Firefox plug-ins/add-ons have been invaluable for development tasks (i.e. the web developer addon, abduction [for saving the page as an image], tamper data, etc...).
I agree, but I use Firefox specifically for webdevelopment. For private browsing I use Opera because if its greater stability and performance.
(Although Firefox 3 is rumoured to be a huge improvement over Firefox 2 there.)
What's their completely new approach? All I noticed about was the screenshots of favorites (Opera / speed dial), private browsing (IE8 beta), and separate processes for tabs.
Seperate processes for tabs is exactly why I'm going to use it. Opera and Firefox grind to a halt when one tab locks up. It sounds like Chrome is designed to prevent that.
I think the scripting engine was written from scratch.
Probably the most important feature for Google. They already have some very popular javascript-intensive sites. The more efficiently and safely javascript runs in browsers, the richer they can make their web applications.
The web already has four "major" browsers firefox, IE, safari and opera. Do we really need a new browser?
I vote we ditch one of the old ones.
It'd have to be a generation ship, and having it travel farther would mostly mean either more stops for picking up fuel and other raw materials, or loading it with more of the same before it is launched.
True, but the crew that arrives won't be the crew that left, and that might make a huge difference. Or not. We can't be sure because nothing like that has ever been done before, but I think increasing the number of generations the journey lasts will increase a lot of uncertainties.
I may disagree with you about Faces - like EJB it seems a step too far, better to learn to write your own JSP tags and develop stuff that is clean, focused on what you need and that you understand.
I'm not really a big fan of JSP or JSF, but they're what everybody's doing these days. That's the main reason I'm recommending it. Personally I prefer a framework that separates markup from code, like Wicket. But it's hard finding a job with that.
The are many Java project in the Apache Foundation website, but that is a different kettle of fish.
That's exactly the kettle of fish I'm talking about.
Citation please? Or explanation? Something other than claim asserted by appeal to your personal beliefs?
How about the fact that a circle is a very special kind of ellipse? For every circle with a specific radius (or orbital speed), there's an infinite number of non-circular ellipses with the same average radius (or orbital speed).
So once you throw randomness into the mix (like gravitational interaction between multiple bodies), you're infinitely more likely to end up with a non-circular orbit than with a circular one.
I'm afraid I have no citations for you, nor am I a mathematician, but with a bit of luck, one will be along shortly to explain this with a lot more accuracy than I can. (Unless I'm totally wrong, in which case I hope he'll explain why.)
Of course finding one close to our planet could be bit harder then expected before.
I would assume that once traveling 5 lightyears is feasible, so would be 50 or 500 lightyears.
That depends a lot on what you consider feasible. At 0.1c, a 5 ly journey can be completed within a human lifetime. With 50 or 500 ly that won't work. And while communication with a 10-year lag is annoying, it's not as bad as a lag of several generations.
If we ever invent warpdrive that uses negligible fuel, 500 ly might be a breeze, but in general, orders of magnitude do matter.
well luckily the universe is big enough that we dont really need it to be a very common occurrence
We don't need anything at all in this respect. It's clear that at least one solar system among many billions of billions is suitable for life, and that's all we need.
But it is interesting to find if there might be other life out there somewhere, and if our kind of solar system is extremely rare, it's a lot less likely that we'll ever discover other life, even if it does exist.
Have you actually tried running your simulation for (simulated) four billion years? Don't you think that over a long period of time the various objects would act on one another to even their orbits out? That's the way I understood our current setup arose.
You mean accidentally reaching a circular orbit again after the orbit had already become elliptical? I think that'd be extremely unlikely. When various objects act on one another (as they invariably do), they're most likely to become more elliptical, not less.
My opinion was completely reversed, because in a world where opensource is aspiring and component based development is becoming cleaner and easier, the languages with most opensource software, such as C/C++, PHP, Perl, MySQL, etc will grow even faster.
Are you saying there is not a lot of open source Java software? Ever heard of Apache? It's all about component based open source. And so are tons of other Java projects.
Seriously, is there some shortage on Java dicumentation out there or something?
Quite the opposite. There's such a fucking huge load of Java stuff out there, that it really is hard to figure out where to start. In fact, the immense amount of Java architecture is the single largest hurdle for new Java programmers.
So here's my advice:
Do:
Dont:
All of this just IMHO ofcourse. YMMV HTH HAND.