Re:Cocoa + Distributed Objects
on
.NET or CORBA?
·
· Score: 1
Is distrubted objects a part of OpenStep, too? If that's the case, the hardware concerns go away. . .
Start with some research
on
.NET or CORBA?
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
No, really. If you don't even know if either.NET or CORBA+GTK supports OpenGL, widgets, and interface contracts, you don't know enough about either architecture to make any kind of informed decision, regardless of what the/. crowd says.
Personally, I'd be inclined to use CORBA+GTK for the simple reason that I don't like to be tied to any one platform, and last I heard Mono is not quite mature enough to make it a viable implementation of.NET for non-Windows platforms.
But if.NET is even an option, you're probably working at a fairly dedicated Windows shop, so that's a moot point. . .
Depends on how much bandwidth the schools have. A lot of K-12 schools are running on a single DSL line that may or may not be throttled to something less than 1.5mbit. If the line pipe is always full, it makes sense to close the ports for all services that are generally used for recreational rather than academic purposes.
Then again, given the amount of time most my teachers spent just trying to figure out how to work a computer during my classes' time in the computer labs because they were never trained, I'd say having computers in the classrom is more of a bandwidth hog.
Not a very good link. . . the links to the meat of that site are all dead (can't get to the page that actually comares the two, for example).
Also, It was last updated in 1999. Gnome and KDE have both changed a LOT since 1999 - I'd say enough so to make a comparison of them from that era completely unapplicable to the current versions.
Re:Its a better one player game
on
Sim-Dud?
·
· Score: 0
There's not really any gameplay, either.
It's more like it's become FurryMuck for foo dollars a month.
Yes, I realize that the neutrons are generally moving much, much faster.
Re:Temperature detectors...
on
Columbia Coverage
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I think the point that a lot of people forget about this is that the Space Shuttle is something that we launch into space strapped to a pair of 15-story solid propellant rockets and a fuel tank larger than you can even think of.
Then we let it sit around in an environment that has all sorts of tiny little rocks and pieces of metal and neutrons and such flying around at bullet speeds for a week or two.
Then we drop it back into the atmosphere and try to land it on the earth. During this process it accelerates to speeds faster than just about any manmade object as ever moved before and heats up to thousands of degrees.
As you can imagine, there is quite a lot of danger involved here. Rather than criticizin NASA for the accident, let's recognize how amazing it is that their safety record is as good as it is, and see what we can do to learn from this catastrophe.
It currently costs thousands of dollars to launch a pound of material into space.
Even when the technology to grow carbon nanotubes large enough to handle the immense forces involved in being used for a space elevator, the cable is still going to weigh thousands and thousands of tons.
The cable is also going to have to have a counterweight weighing at least as much as the cable itself to balance the space elevator in orbit.
Plus, there are a whole host of engineering concerns that haven't been addresed about a space elevator yet. These would have to be a dead issue, given how much of a catastrophe it would be should a space elevator ever come crashing back to earth.
So it's not really a question of if it's possible, so much as a question of safety plus who is going to foot the bill for its fabrication, launch, and assembly. Given the financial woes that have surrounded the ISS since its conception, I think the clear answer would be nobody.
And by the time we do have the prolems solved, the money to do it, and the industrial capacity to manufacture such a beast, someone will almost definitely have come up with a much better idea, anyway.
There are probably much less hazardous fluids than thransformer oil. Transformer oil probably wouldn't work for a convective system anyway, since my bet is it's way too viscous for the forces at hand to work efficiently.
at 18kb for the Word *.doc version of my term paper and 8kb for the OpenOffice *.sxw version, I don't think either of them would fit on an Atari 2600 cart.
Granted, the OpenOffice file is merely bloated while the Word one is reminiscent of the restauraunt scene in Monty Python's The Meanting of Life.
no, really. If people want to send you e-mail, make them send it pgp. If a message is sent non-pgp, have them re-send it pgp.
That, or have your mailserver put e-mail from unrecognized e-mail addresses into a waiting pool and have it bounce an e-mail back to the sending address as confirmation that there is a live human being at the other end of the address. If you're expecting e-mails from addresses with machines on the other end, look in the spam cesspool for them or add the originating e-mail address to your mailserver's "ok" list.
Calm down, sugar. He did it for the same reason others build their own robots rather than buying an Aibo. It's a toy. Nobody's going to take your precious Apple firmware off your iPod.
Take something involving a depth first search of some state space. This is generally an inherently recursive problem. Pesudocode that resembles Scheme (or Lisp if you're lazy, or FORTH if you're frisky, etc.) tends to force you to work within the recursive nature of the problem because you get beaten over the head with what my professors used to like to call "elegance." (Here, elegance is a euphemism for "no variables, no loops, everything is recursive, functions are first class.")
If one were approaching the problem from another paradigm of programming and using the standard "Learn to Program in One Week" book spaghetti-pseudo, it would be easy to fall into using some horrible mess of overlapping loops or something like that. I've seen people turn relatively simple problems into gitantic tangles of wild pointers just because they didn't think recursively.
I'm not sure I would call functional programming circuitous. Granted, one has to learn to think in an inductive manner in order to handle recursion, but I have found functional programs to be almost more directed than imperative programming. In an imperative language, you can sit down and twiddle a bit here and there, working towards the goal at your leisure. In a functional programming language, you have to never lose sight of your goal. Every line of code has to have a clear and well-defined role in achieving that goal.
That's why I tend to prototype functions & algorithms in a more lisp-style pseudocode even when I'm writing in C. I find that I end up writing much cleaner code when I prototype in functional pseudocode.
I had a similar experience involving throat-singing. Not only are they persistent, they appear to also have an impressively high tolerance to pain. (That or they're all hard of hearing.)
With the International call rates I'm able to find often being well above $0.20 per minute, I'm not sure who SmegCo could ever get phone service cheap enough to cover their costs in any country outside the U.S. without charging a price per call that's still far more outlandish than anything J. Random Fly-By-Night, LLC could ever afford.
Methinks it'd end up being much chaper for Trailer Trash, LLC to find a domestic telemarketing firm that will stick to DNC lists and be willing to promote their scam.
Slashdot Mirror
OpenStep is a specification, not just the library.
Implementations of it exist on all major operating systems.
I fail to see where it would be so expensive compared ot a switch to Mac OS X, which would require a switch to new (and more expensive) hardware.
Nokia has chosen not to release it in Japan because they don't support Japan's mobile phone protocol.
That alone is a good reason to assume that it will go the way of the Atari Lynx.
Which is too bad. . . the handheld game system market really needs a kick in the pants.
the way they seem to have no target market with this product.
Is it for the same kinds of people who carry a GBA around constantly? no, those are mostly kids.
Is it for wired techno business folk who like to play games, too? no, they wouldn't want to be seen talking to a Game Boy by the boss.
Is it for people who just like toys too damn much? Sorry, I think that the only product the slashdot crowd can support on its own is slashdot.
Watch me do it with my real name.
FOURTH POST!!!!
Is distrubted objects a part of OpenStep, too? If that's the case, the hardware concerns go away. . .
No, really. If you don't even know if either .NET or CORBA+GTK supports OpenGL, widgets, and interface contracts, you don't know enough about either architecture to make any kind of informed decision, regardless of what the /. crowd says.
.NET for non-Windows platforms.
.NET is even an option, you're probably working at a fairly dedicated Windows shop, so that's a moot point. . .
Personally, I'd be inclined to use CORBA+GTK for the simple reason that I don't like to be tied to any one platform, and last I heard Mono is not quite mature enough to make it a viable implementation of
But if
duh.
Depends on how much bandwidth the schools have. A lot of K-12 schools are running on a single DSL line that may or may not be throttled to something less than 1.5mbit. If the line pipe is always full, it makes sense to close the ports for all services that are generally used for recreational rather than academic purposes.
Then again, given the amount of time most my teachers spent just trying to figure out how to work a computer during my classes' time in the computer labs because they were never trained, I'd say having computers in the classrom is more of a bandwidth hog.
but what if it lands on your wife.
Like we say in Nevada, better a few snags than a few hags.
Not a very good link. . . the links to the meat of that site are all dead (can't get to the page that actually comares the two, for example).
Also, It was last updated in 1999. Gnome and KDE have both changed a LOT since 1999 - I'd say enough so to make a comparison of them from that era completely unapplicable to the current versions.
There's not really any gameplay, either.
It's more like it's become FurryMuck for foo dollars a month.
Yes, I realize that the neutrons are generally moving much, much faster.
I think the point that a lot of people forget about this is that the Space Shuttle is something that we launch into space strapped to a pair of 15-story solid propellant rockets and a fuel tank larger than you can even think of.
Then we let it sit around in an environment that has all sorts of tiny little rocks and pieces of metal and neutrons and such flying around at bullet speeds for a week or two.
Then we drop it back into the atmosphere and try to land it on the earth. During this process it accelerates to speeds faster than just about any manmade object as ever moved before and heats up to thousands of degrees.
As you can imagine, there is quite a lot of danger involved here. Rather than criticizin NASA for the accident, let's recognize how amazing it is that their safety record is as good as it is, and see what we can do to learn from this catastrophe.
Think about this for a moment. . .
It currently costs thousands of dollars to launch a pound of material into space.
Even when the technology to grow carbon nanotubes large enough to handle the immense forces involved in being used for a space elevator, the cable is still going to weigh thousands and thousands of tons.
The cable is also going to have to have a counterweight weighing at least as much as the cable itself to balance the space elevator in orbit.
Plus, there are a whole host of engineering concerns that haven't been addresed about a space elevator yet. These would have to be a dead issue, given how much of a catastrophe it would be should a space elevator ever come crashing back to earth.
So it's not really a question of if it's possible, so much as a question of safety plus who is going to foot the bill for its fabrication, launch, and assembly. Given the financial woes that have surrounded the ISS since its conception, I think the clear answer would be nobody.
And by the time we do have the prolems solved, the money to do it, and the industrial capacity to manufacture such a beast, someone will almost definitely have come up with a much better idea, anyway.
There are probably much less hazardous fluids than thransformer oil. Transformer oil probably wouldn't work for a convective system anyway, since my bet is it's way too viscous for the forces at hand to work efficiently.
at 18kb for the Word *.doc version of my term paper and 8kb for the OpenOffice *.sxw version, I don't think either of them would fit on an Atari 2600 cart.
Granted, the OpenOffice file is merely bloated while the Word one is reminiscent of the restauraunt scene in Monty Python's The Meanting of Life.
Because regardless of race, nation, or creed, legislation and intelligence are mutually exclusive.
no, really. If people want to send you e-mail, make them send it pgp. If a message is sent non-pgp, have them re-send it pgp.
That, or have your mailserver put e-mail from unrecognized e-mail addresses into a waiting pool and have it bounce an e-mail back to the sending address as confirmation that there is a live human being at the other end of the address. If you're expecting e-mails from addresses with machines on the other end, look in the spam cesspool for them or add the originating e-mail address to your mailserver's "ok" list.
Calm down, sugar. He did it for the same reason others build their own robots rather than buying an Aibo. It's a toy. Nobody's going to take your precious Apple firmware off your iPod.
Take something involving a depth first search of some state space. This is generally an inherently recursive problem. Pesudocode that resembles Scheme (or Lisp if you're lazy, or FORTH if you're frisky, etc.) tends to force you to work within the recursive nature of the problem because you get beaten over the head with what my professors used to like to call "elegance." (Here, elegance is a euphemism for "no variables, no loops, everything is recursive, functions are first class.")
If one were approaching the problem from another paradigm of programming and using the standard "Learn to Program in One Week" book spaghetti-pseudo, it would be easy to fall into using some horrible mess of overlapping loops or something like that. I've seen people turn relatively simple problems into gitantic tangles of wild pointers just because they didn't think recursively.
*EEEEEOOOOEEEEOOOEEEEOOOEEEOOO* -- annoying siren
Godwin's Law is in effect. Return to your homes. Resist the urge to add further posts to the conversation. Repeat, do not continue this thread.
*EEEEOOEEEOOEEEEEEEE*
I'm not sure I would call functional programming circuitous. Granted, one has to learn to think in an inductive manner in order to handle recursion, but I have found functional programs to be almost more directed than imperative programming. In an imperative language, you can sit down and twiddle a bit here and there, working towards the goal at your leisure. In a functional programming language, you have to never lose sight of your goal. Every line of code has to have a clear and well-defined role in achieving that goal.
That's why I tend to prototype functions & algorithms in a more lisp-style pseudocode even when I'm writing in C. I find that I end up writing much cleaner code when I prototype in functional pseudocode.
Plus most script kiddies would be left scratching their head trying to use it.
All my servers run CP/M for the same reason.
I had a similar experience involving throat-singing. Not only are they persistent, they appear to also have an impressively high tolerance to pain. (That or they're all hard of hearing.)
With the International call rates I'm able to find often being well above $0.20 per minute, I'm not sure who SmegCo could ever get phone service cheap enough to cover their costs in any country outside the U.S. without charging a price per call that's still far more outlandish than anything J. Random Fly-By-Night, LLC could ever afford.
Methinks it'd end up being much chaper for Trailer Trash, LLC to find a domestic telemarketing firm that will stick to DNC lists and be willing to promote their scam.