The question is flawed. Anyone worth their weight as a programmer doesn't care what language they program in but. But Programing Methodoligy should they work with. Assuming that you use to Object Orianted Languages (C++, Java,.NET) which are a deveation of Procedural Based Languges (C, Pascal, FORTRAN). So after knowing those methodoligies perhaps you should study functional languages (LISP, SCHEME, HASCAL) or Logic Based Languges (Prolog). Hold up there! You're vastly over-simplifying the issue. Many programming languages can't be divided cleanly into the categories you name. For instance, is Common Lisp a procedural, functional, or object orientated language?
Some languages are very interchangeable, such as Java and C#. Other languages are vastly different, and attempting to draw discrete boundaries around them is not going to succeed. Any language worth knowing is a methodology all in itself. Smalltalk and Java are both object orientated languages, but there are considerable differences between the two languages, in implementation and philosophy.
My guess is that you're an undergrad at University, as you remind me of myself at that age. Try reading up on Forth, Lisp and Smalltalk. Contrast Qi to Haskell, Io to Java, Clojure to Scala. The differences between programming languages are far more pronounced than you appear to think.
Yes, and I've also had Linux do the same thing. It didn't give an error, but no matter how many times I "kill -9"ed it the process never paid attention to the command and carried on churning away. I guess that's the process rather than the OS, but it's still not always "all-powerful root". "kill -9" tells the kernel directly to remove the process from memory, bypassing the process itself. I've never had a "kill -9" fail to destroy a process. The only reason I can think of it failing in your case is either a kernel bug (maybe in a hardware driver), or so much IO activity that the SIGKILL signal has been prevented from reaching the kernel. I've heard that IO is set to a higher priority than signals, so maybe that's the cause.
It's very rare that kill -9 would fail, though. I've certainly never encountered it, whilst Windows has refused to kill a process on numerous occasions.
You could probably get a better return off trading cultural information, such as famous plays or novels. Data doesn't take up much space, so you could use a relatively small, robotic ship and get a pretty big return. Or just use a really big communications laser and hope someone is listening.
This is exactly what The Transparent Society proposes. Leveling the playing field. Schneider seems to be proposing we go further than just leveling the playing field. Yes, he's proposing that the government become more transparent, but he's also arguing that the activities of its citizens become more opaque.
Brin wants a level playing field, but Schneider's arguing that we should slope the field heavily away from the government. If they have all the guns, we should at least have a monopoly on the data to preserve the balance of power.
Because the larger companies can now buy the rights to your public domain IP and sell it? Yes that will probably be illegal but if its public domain its not like you have the rights to complain. How could they "buy the rights to your public domain IP"? Who would they buy it from?
You might as worry about companies buying the rights to happiness.
Yeah, maybe. I brought up that possibility in an email to them, but the Relakks guys don't appear to answer email, so I couldn't confirm whether the problem was at their end or mine. I gave up on them partly because I couldn't connect 95% of the time, partly because there's no way to contact them. Other VPNs seem to work fine, so if it is my ISP, then they're just doing it for Relakks.
I've been playing around with the idea of switching ISPs anyway. Maybe when I've changed I'll see Relakks works.
Recently it's been impossible to connect to Relakks. I stopped using it because it was so busy it would never accept a connection. No reply to any emails, either.
I can assure you, you don't want this. You assume that the ISP's are going to give you a "reasonable" block of data to transfer on a monthly basis and a reasonable price - they are not. This tends to be what happens in other countries. I'm not sure that the US ISPs would price themselves much higher than they are already. US internet access is already pretty expensive, and I'm not sure they could really get away with raising the price much more when, internationally, the price per GB is plummeting.
Too bad it is the second thing that OS projects usually lack, with the first one being sound documentation. In my experience, proprietary projects usually lack both these things as well.
Whilst the rights guaranteed by the US constitution are being increasingly ignored by the US government, we're still not quite at the stage where custom officials can indefinitely detain an individual without evidence.
Actually, there is such thing as an secure electronic voting system. You can use cryptography to ensure that a voting process is at least as resistant to tampering as one done on paper, if not more so. There's some very interesting papers on it.
Those that want to do something clever simply have to learn enough to use work it in gracefully. How many Rails plugins have you written that significantly alter core classes? From the way you're talking, I'd guess zero.
This has been the case with *any* RAD (rapid app development) tool since the dawn of frameworks. Nobody has figured out how to solve this barrier. I don't believe this to be the case. Every problem I've found with Rails is conceivably fixable. A lot of it is just due to the Rails devs stuffing things into the bloated maw of ActiveRecord that really shouldn't be in there, and not separating out their methods properly. I have great hopes for some of the up and coming Ruby ORM libraries to replace AR with something rather leaner.
Their dependencies between each other need to be fairly light so that that you don't have to buy the whole barn if you just want a cow. This generally requires a scriptish language that is not anal over types. Being anal over types isn't a bad thing, so long as you have a sophisticated enough type system to offer the developer. A good type system, like the one in Haskell, allows for very generic functions.
5. Rails is extremely flexible I'm a Rails developer, and I have to say I disagree with this. When you work within Rail's comfort zone, it's a joy to develop in. But start to edge outside those boundaries, and suddenly everything starts to fall apart. A lot of things that could be made modular are currently hard coded, especially in the monolithic and huge ActiveRecord. Rails is designed to work well given certain conditions, but try to do anything clever or unusual, and it's a toss up whether you'll get away with it without running into problems.
Rails may be a nice framework, but flexible it ain't.
Now industry is calling for more developers who can do concurrent applications - but how can you expect them to understand and build a system that avoids race conditions, when they don't even understand pointers? Why are C-style pointers any more useful than Java-style references for building concurrent applications?
These laws are an inevitable consequence of the European/Socialist system... Given all the pervious acts of socialists, hacking tool bans should be the least of your worries. In the past, Jews, Genetics and Cybernetics, Hate Speech, Overtime pay, Tobacco and Abortions all were deemed harmful. On the other hand:
Those socialist Europeans countries manage to come top in terms of press freedoms and quality of life.
Have more liberal laws on DRM, copyright infringment, drugs, abortions and stem cell research than the US.
Have tougher privacy laws that limit what corporations and the government are legally allowed to do with your personal information.
I think you have about nailed the description of linux on the desktop, with 1325134 programs that start with the letter K or G followed by names that do not have anything to do with what the program is about (konqueror/internet explorer, krita/photoshop, amarok/windows media player, need I go on? Aren't the names on windows just a tad more descriptive/obvious?). Not all Linux desktop distros are like this. Ubuntu's menus tend to be labeled quite descriptively. For instance, the link to gedit is labeled "Text Editor", Totem is labeled "Movie Player", Firefox is "Firefox Web Browser", and Pidgin is "Pidgin Instant Messenger".
The scheme in Ubuntu seems to be to just use the description, except in cases where the brand is well known or there are a lot of alternatives. It's pretty sensible; the menu path "/Applications/Internet/Firefox Web Brower" is more informative and logical than "/Start/All Programs/Mozilla Firefox/Mozilla Firefox".
But you could do the same thing in PHP. To an extent. The problem is that PHP is a pretty shitty language. Ruby has it's flaws, but it's object model is well designed, and its syntax is extremely flexible. PHP frameworks that attempt to emulate Rails are invariably limited by their language.
Meh, all SQL-based databases are broken to some extent, and ActiveRecord requiring primary keys on all tables is less an affront to Codd's design than the things built into any SQL database you care to name. SQL is as much a hack as ActiveRecord, and not as concise.
ok, fine. well an insane law like this is the only thing that will get us such a world. i'm sorry, but that's the truth Here's an alternative law: any manufacturer that makes consumer wifi routers must have strong encryption enabled by default on their devices.
This law fixes the problem far more effectively than the "insane" law you advocate, and does not penalize those who want to run an open wireless network.
No it's incredibly shoddy coding that could be done on any platform. Eh, I wouldn't be so quick to condemn, as your encryption system doesn't look too strong, either. It would take more effort to break it than plain text, but I can see at least two fatal flaws in it that could be exploited with a little bit of effort. I hope you're not using it to secure anything critical.
Your best bet is to generate a random GUID and use that to identify the user. Any data you don't want to be tampered with, such as usernames or access rights, you shouldn't let out of the server, even in an "encrypted" form.
Slashdot Mirror
program in but. But Programing Methodoligy should they work with. Assuming that you use to
Object Orianted Languages (C++, Java,
Pascal, FORTRAN). So after knowing those methodoligies perhaps you should study functional languages
(LISP, SCHEME, HASCAL) or Logic Based Languges (Prolog). Hold up there! You're vastly over-simplifying the issue. Many programming languages can't be divided cleanly into the categories you name. For instance, is Common Lisp a procedural, functional, or object orientated language?
Some languages are very interchangeable, such as Java and C#. Other languages are vastly different, and attempting to draw discrete boundaries around them is not going to succeed. Any language worth knowing is a methodology all in itself. Smalltalk and Java are both object orientated languages, but there are considerable differences between the two languages, in implementation and philosophy.
My guess is that you're an undergrad at University, as you remind me of myself at that age. Try reading up on Forth, Lisp and Smalltalk. Contrast Qi to Haskell, Io to Java, Clojure to Scala. The differences between programming languages are far more pronounced than you appear to think.
It's very rare that kill -9 would fail, though. I've certainly never encountered it, whilst Windows has refused to kill a process on numerous occasions.
You could probably get a better return off trading cultural information, such as famous plays or novels. Data doesn't take up much space, so you could use a relatively small, robotic ship and get a pretty big return. Or just use a really big communications laser and hope someone is listening.
I have the same setup, but Compiz has always been as smooth as silk for me. What distro are you using?
Brin wants a level playing field, but Schneider's arguing that we should slope the field heavily away from the government. If they have all the guns, we should at least have a monopoly on the data to preserve the balance of power.
I've seen some rather nice syntax sugar for monads implemented with callcc in Ruby.
You might as worry about companies buying the rights to happiness.
Yeah, maybe. I brought up that possibility in an email to them, but the Relakks guys don't appear to answer email, so I couldn't confirm whether the problem was at their end or mine. I gave up on them partly because I couldn't connect 95% of the time, partly because there's no way to contact them. Other VPNs seem to work fine, so if it is my ISP, then they're just doing it for Relakks.
I've been playing around with the idea of switching ISPs anyway. Maybe when I've changed I'll see Relakks works.
Recently it's been impossible to connect to Relakks. I stopped using it because it was so busy it would never accept a connection. No reply to any emails, either.
The closest EFF equivalent in the UK is the Open Rights Group (ORG).
Whilst the rights guaranteed by the US constitution are being increasingly ignored by the US government, we're still not quite at the stage where custom officials can indefinitely detain an individual without evidence.
Actually, there is such thing as an secure electronic voting system. You can use cryptography to ensure that a voting process is at least as resistant to tampering as one done on paper, if not more so. There's some very interesting papers on it.
To stop companies in the US having that feature.
The one-click checkout idea sucks anyway, so I can't see a lot of sites using it even if it weren't patented.
Rails may be a nice framework, but flexible it ain't.
The scheme in Ubuntu seems to be to just use the description, except in cases where the brand is well known or there are a lot of alternatives. It's pretty sensible; the menu path "/Applications/Internet/Firefox Web Brower" is more informative and logical than "/Start/All Programs/Mozilla Firefox/Mozilla Firefox".
Meh, all SQL-based databases are broken to some extent, and ActiveRecord requiring primary keys on all tables is less an affront to Codd's design than the things built into any SQL database you care to name. SQL is as much a hack as ActiveRecord, and not as concise.
This law fixes the problem far more effectively than the "insane" law you advocate, and does not penalize those who want to run an open wireless network.
Your best bet is to generate a random GUID and use that to identify the user. Any data you don't want to be tampered with, such as usernames or access rights, you shouldn't let out of the server, even in an "encrypted" form.