Flight tests completed by NASA, with government and industry partners, may have demonstrated a way to reduce the window-rattling impact of sonic booms.
the big deal is that when some random suit emails you a document, not only will it be in a closed format for a closed OS (MSWord on Windows), now it will enforce that you are reading it with real MS Word on Real windows, and not some importing it into an open product. And best of all the document will phone home before you can read it.
Can you say "vendor lock-in"? Can you say "spyware"?
I realised after posting that comment that it's not such a big deal. Most spam is deceptive or fraudulent somewhere in the chain of its creation, such as the from header, already.
However the AMTP protocol seems, at a brief inspection have the principle that you have to say who you are and what you are doing. You can be called to account for it. Transgressions can be traced back to thier originator.
Spammers would be driven further into illegality. The rest is really a social problem, not a technological one. For this protocol to work it would need action taken against those who break the code. AMTP would make them easy to find - that is definitely a good thing, all that's up for debate is if AMTP goes far enough.
It is clear what has happened. Young passions don't last. San (Sandra? Sanchez? Sanitarytowel?) has finally cracked and dumped her acne-faced geek-boy in the worst possible way...
Even real, genuine idiots and losers have no guts and will rarely treat you horribly to your face. But add some remoteness and the sense of safety that comes with email or IM
You have just accurately described the phenomenum of trolling, and not just then slashdot variety.
There's been a proposal that Oracle and Google swap names. The names have the following meanings
Oracle: gives you an answer that can be cryptic or unexpected but is often enlightening. Clearly a search engine. Google: a very large amount. Clearly a database.
@_. Oh, and Perl {and this definitely influenced PHP} indicates variable types with a prefix, so even within speech marks, it can spot a variable and insert the value.
PERL didn't orignate that syntax, and no doubt some poor suckers will include it in future languages. Are you trolling?
Re:Parrot - yet another virtual machine strategy
on
State of the Onion 7
·
· Score: 1
Well, now we have the Java virtual machine, the Microsoft.NET VM, and the Parrot VM, each of which supports multiple languages.
You forgot mono. Now why don't they get on board parrot? At last then the open-source zealots will have one VM to root for.
Brand recognition is not always a good thing. When I think NY times I think "that annoying registration website". They are free to do what they want, but it leaves me cold.
What is the difference between "artificial intelligence" and "simulating artificial intelligence". It's like simulating addition. If you simulate adding 2 and 2, do you get a simulation of an answer equal to 4, or do you get 4?
Some things like the answer to a maths sum, the next move in a game of chess, and the response to a text question, the simulation *is* the real thing. So whoever wrote that is lacking a few clues.
Default parameters and function overloading. Both encourage lazy programming and, more importantly, hide bugs.
No they don't. You don't provide any justifcation for your silly assertion, so neither shall I. But neverthess that is my experience.
These features allow a way to add parameters to an oft-used without breaking existing code.
If anything in C++ is syntactic sugar that hides bugs, it is operator overloading. I still remember a bug that hid in plain sight for days because some bright spark had overrdden the deref operator to return the wrong level of indirection. Ick.
The parent comment is correct and insightfull..NET is MS's System API, done better with hindsight and OO
not to throw a monkey wrench into the works, but the only reason the windows platform stays around now is inertia -- people have legacy apps they can't live without. How will those run under.NET? if they can't, people won't switch.
Legacy Apps that are compiled to x86 machine code by definition don't and can't run under.NET.
people won't switch
Not entirely no, but it soon will be the default way to write new windows applications. Considering that it's on a VM, insulated from the hardware, this means that say 5-10 years after that, most windows programs will be portable by default (say it softly: just like java!).
And if they use an emulator, then why not go with a lower TCO system
You are refering to that "open source" malarkey, aren't you? No seriously, I'm sure that some will, and some won't.
being held captive to MS is becoming less and less appealing to many businesses
I'm sure that they have enough sense not to cut of thier own money supply.
In German we use the verb "begreifen" for the process of understanding something that you learn. That verb contains the "greifen" which means that you can grab something.
In English that would be "grasp". the more you look at language, the nore metaphors you will find.
Hmm, so they looked at 58,944 lines of code, and found 31 defects? Did they find every defect? Can they prove this?
Proving program correctness and bugfreeness is real hard. If they did find every defect and they can prove it, then I supect that it would be a significant breakthrough in Computer Science, not to mention a comercial goldmine.
Because you don't know which ends are dead until you try them?
Think of it as evolution in action: Generate a whole bunch of new ideas, the ones that don't work out get discarded, the survivors spawn off many variants. Lather, rinse repeat.
Linus has stated that he has no master plan. This is good. As the evolutionary biologists keep saying: dumb, brute force, try 'em all evolution is smarter than you are.
In general, open source does a lot more trial-and error than commercial software. In the log run, this is good.
And another thing, why are mobile phones generally still things you hold up to your head to use, rather than always coming with usable wireless headsets?
Usability. Because one gadget is harder to lose than two. Because one gadget is easier to charge than two.
Slashdot Mirror
First paragraph:
Just when the Thames is getting back to a more or less clean state ... where the only thing that wants to live there are 6 legged frogs.
As a Londoner, I resemble that remark!
the big deal is that when some random suit emails you a document, not only will it be in a closed format for a closed OS (MSWord on Windows), now it will enforce that you are reading it with real MS Word on Real windows, and not some importing it into an open product. And best of all the document will phone home before you can read it.
Can you say "vendor lock-in"? Can you say "spyware"?
I realised after posting that comment that it's not such a big deal. Most spam is deceptive or fraudulent somewhere in the chain of its creation, such as the from header, already.
However the AMTP protocol seems, at a brief inspection have the principle that you have to say who you are and what you are doing. You can be called to account for it. Transgressions can be traced back to thier originator.
Spammers would be driven further into illegality. The rest is really a social problem, not a technological one. For this protocol to work it would need action taken against those who break the code. AMTP would make them easy to find - that is definitely a good thing, all that's up for debate is if AMTP goes far enough.
What about a spammer puting a false "Personal" bit instead of "commercial" in the protocal to get through?
Let them. Advertising gadgets is not illegal. Lying in order to do so is.
It is clear what has happened. Young passions don't last. San (Sandra? Sanchez? Sanitarytowel?) has finally cracked and dumped her acne-faced geek-boy in the worst possible way...
> > So instead of using (32 feet/second^2), one should instead declare g once
> Of course if the gravitational constant changes, we've got bigger problems
Well maybe, but what are the odds of the USA finally waking up to the fact that g is 9.8 meters / second ^ 2 ?
Even real, genuine idiots and losers have no guts and will rarely treat you horribly to your face. But add some remoteness and the sense of safety that comes with email or IM
You have just accurately described the phenomenum of trolling, and not just then slashdot variety.
why not a SCO section? There's more SCO news these days
Uh, because Apple will be making the news a lot longer than SCO will be?
There's been a proposal that Oracle and Google swap names. The names have the following meanings
Oracle: gives you an answer that can be cryptic or unexpected but is often enlightening. Clearly a search engine.
Google: a very large amount. Clearly a database.
You have to install lots and lots of extra stuff on Windows to make it work over ssh.
Erm, ssh is extra stuff, it's just that most open-source distros aggregate software from many origins from the outset.
so not only did you not read the linked article, you didn't even read the slashdot article before posting?
Hint: look for the word "cross-shredded"
@_. Oh, and Perl {and this definitely influenced PHP} indicates variable types with a prefix, so even within speech marks, it can spot a variable and insert the value.
PERL didn't orignate that syntax, and no doubt some poor suckers will include it in future languages. Are you trolling?
Well, now we have the Java virtual machine, the Microsoft .NET VM, and the Parrot VM, each of which supports multiple languages.
You forgot mono. Now why don't they get on board parrot? At last then the open-source zealots will have one VM to root for.
I can't agree with that. My sense of morbid curiosity makes gerbils look positively ignorant.
So what you are saying is that your personal temperament is more important than doing a sensitive job in a profesional manner.
Possession of information is never wrong
Oh good. Can I then install several surveilance cameras and microphones in your bedroom and bathroom?
Brand recognition is not always a good thing. When I think NY times I think "that annoying registration website". They are free to do what they want, but it leaves me cold.
What is the difference between "artificial intelligence" and "simulating artificial intelligence". It's like simulating addition. If you simulate adding 2 and 2, do you get a simulation of an answer equal to 4, or do you get 4?
Some things like the answer to a maths sum, the next move in a game of chess, and the response to a text question, the simulation *is* the real thing. So whoever wrote that is lacking a few clues.
Exactly - if you're too lazy to modify the code then C++ lets you get away with it. Ugh.
Uhh.. do you work in your own private universe? What I mean is, you don't interface with other people/company/toolkit's code much do you?
Default parameters and function overloading. Both encourage lazy programming and, more importantly, hide bugs.
No they don't. You don't provide any justifcation for your silly assertion, so neither shall I. But neverthess that is my experience.
These features allow a way to add parameters to an oft-used without breaking existing code.
If anything in C++ is syntactic sugar that hides bugs, it is operator overloading. I still remember a bug that hid in plain sight for days because some bright spark had overrdden the deref operator to return the wrong level of indirection. Ick.
"It's not taking the place of studying; nor is it taking away from other activities,"
This has got to be wrong. Our time is finite. *Anything* that you do that takes up time means less time left over for the other stuff.
Either that or they've found a way to increase the number of hours in the day. Can I have some of that please?
The parent comment is correct and insightfull. .NET is MS's System API, done better with hindsight and OO
.NET? if they can't, people won't switch.
.NET.
not to throw a monkey wrench into the works, but the only reason the windows platform stays around now is inertia -- people have legacy apps they can't live without. How will those run under
Legacy Apps that are compiled to x86 machine code by definition don't and can't run under
people won't switch
Not entirely no, but it soon will be the default way to write new windows applications. Considering that it's on a VM, insulated from the hardware, this means that say 5-10 years after that, most windows programs will be portable by default (say it softly: just like java!).
And if they use an emulator, then why not go with a lower TCO system
You are refering to that "open source" malarkey, aren't you? No seriously, I'm sure that some will, and some won't.
being held captive to MS is becoming less and less appealing to many businesses
I'm sure that they have enough sense not to cut of thier own money supply.
In German we use the verb "begreifen" for the process of understanding something that you learn. That verb contains the "greifen" which means that you can grab something.
In English that would be "grasp". the more you look at language, the nore metaphors you will find.
Hmm, so they looked at 58,944 lines of code, and found 31 defects? Did they find every defect? Can they prove this?
Proving program correctness and bugfreeness is real hard. If they did find every defect and they can prove it, then I supect that it would be a significant breakthrough in Computer Science, not to mention a comercial goldmine.
As you can imagine, I am a bit sceptical.
Because you don't know which ends are dead until you try them?
Think of it as evolution in action: Generate a whole bunch of new ideas, the ones that don't work out get discarded, the survivors spawn off many variants. Lather, rinse repeat.
Linus has stated that he has no master plan. This is good. As the evolutionary biologists keep saying: dumb, brute force, try 'em all evolution is smarter than you are.
In general, open source does a lot more trial-and error than commercial software. In the log run, this is good.
And another thing, why are mobile phones generally still things you hold up to your head to use, rather than always coming with usable wireless headsets?
Usability. Because one gadget is harder to lose than two. Because one gadget is easier to charge than two.