I am a little wary of Google Adwords. I read a post earlier on/. that foretold Google offering a gigabyte of storage on an e-mail service, and the post said that the reason it would be good business is because they could do adwords based on the content of the e-mail.
I find this to be an invasion of my privacy. A personal letter with ads attached to it, based on the subject. If my girlfriend wrote a love letter, I could get an ad for roses. I would rather I just get regular ads. Sure, it may be what I want, but I don't want them to know what I'm thinking before they choose an ad for me.
I have found Google Adwords to be really annoying at times on the plain old web search as well. Sure, they're not images, but some of them are really abnoxious - not too different from typing in the wrong URL is sometimes typing in the wrong search terms.
No Kidding. I saw this about a month ago. That is a pretty cool project. And I could have sworn that I got the link to it from your.sig...and on an investigation of your posting history, I realized that I in fact have. I guess you decided not to have your.sig this type, because it would be redundant, because of your message.
Unfortunately, I do not have that many geek friends (or friends at all, really *sigh*), just a few. If I did, I might check it out.
You can do object oriented and event oriented programming in c fine.
Yeah, but it will be spaghetti code, using type-unsafe macros. Have you looked at a custom GTK+ widget implementation in C before? It is some real ugly code.
So the only difference between QT and GTK from a language perspective is that with GTK you get a choice, QT you only get C++. (Not counting even higher languages such as C# since both have wrappers for that and are sort of equal)
Actually, there are a lot of bindings for Qt. PyQt, for instance. Many consider them to be superior to their GTK+ equivelents.
Writing something in C so it can have a lot of bindings is IMHO not the way to go. There should be other good reasons for writing it in C. You can always add a C interface to it, even one that doesn't use sockets. And many high-level languages have their binding interfaces specifically designed to support C++.
Oooh, porn popups to try and influence the presidential election by draining campaign contributions. Very funny. But really, do you expect that to put a dent in Bush's $1,000,000? And you don't want any swing voters trying to help out in this way and getting sucked in by Bush's evil lies.
Or better yet, learn Ocaml. Up with the best of lisp compilers in terms of speed. Has all the stuff to teach about functional programming, but still allows for iterative programming. Makes clear distinction between mutable data and immutable data.
I think he meant "May or may not do". There is a difference between a program not being capable of doing something and a program being capable of doing something but deliberately not doing it.
How about the new version of Photoshop, that tries to prevent people from printing out conterfeit bills? Now that is deliberately not doing something, and is very different from adding or removing a feature designed for the user in a program.
Now that is funny. Doesn't compile, but that's even better. I would just give him the code and have to run. Then he would ask the next guy how to do it, and they'd his mess of code, and get a laugh. Maybe even pick on him some more.
We would probably end up having a dozen versions of Java out there, and various "java distributions"
But what about Perl and Python? They're open source, but the vast majority of them just use releases from the main project. They have successful forks, which in my opinion, do not take away from the main project, they just provide new ways to use it.
And I actually think it will become irrelevant. I think that in the near future there will be a better language for doing what people do with Java that will run on top of Parrot. I really have high hopes for parrot, and think that it may be as big of an advance in computing as C, Linux, and Perl. Parrot is really a fantastic project.
By the way, I have seen you lurking here before, and have visited your website. It is most excellent.
Because we believe that open sourcing Java is the only way for Sun to fulfill their promise of Write (and compile) Once Run Anywhere.
And if they gave Linux users a chance to hack on it, perhaps the performance gap between Java on Linux and Java on Windows would be erased (although it's mostly gone now, and what would really help it are better graphics drivers/toolkits, and open sourcing Java wouldn't necessarily help any of these).
Disclaimer: I happen to be one of the people who thinks that CS programs should teach people how to code and CS theory but not necessarily how to develop software.
I agree. I would have preferred a Software Engineering program myself. They need to split it up a bit. Or I just need to go to a school that can have a real computer science, computer engineering, and software engineering program.
Yeah, you are actually getting your money's worth. I feel like I've just wasted months of time and thousands of dollars. From my point of view, you're the lucky bastard.
A lot of people found it terribly confusing. I found it quite natural. But I guess that's just because I spend so much time fiddling around with my Linux Distribution, (Gentoo, with a lot of kernel recompiling and other customizations put into it), and I already understood multithreading and IPC that makes all these programs work.
Well, many of these are people that can't have an intelligent conversation about anything related to computers. This is not to say they do not talk, because there are some people that just do it, and don't talk much, and I don't want to knock their competence. These are people who cheat, asking people just to shoot them their code, so they can turn it in as is. They'll say they understand if they can't get their code, but they don't even know where to begin. It's pretty sucky.
That said, your post, and the post about the crypto guys, opened my mind quite a bit, and I realize that some people are smarter than I think.
I'm a guy who tries to learn many nuances and aspects of programs and software, because I'm a linguist and a usability guy. But I also focus on broader concepts, such as saving user's time, preventing bugs, and integration. I guess I'm more of a software engineer than a computer scientist.
Now that the economy is focing CIOs to make effiiency the #1 priority, things like outsourcing certain tasks (especially programming ones) makes a whole lot more sense because you pay for the result, not the time it takes to get there.
True. This could also be taken care of by a decent consulting service. I may give starting one of these a shot, but I'd probably have to find a big way of showing that I can code before I can get my first job. Maybe if I hack away at Parrot or something.
I sure hope that's the case. I am about to graduate with a Bachelors degree in Computer Science and am taking my Capstone course. Two of the four people on our team actually know how to program, and the others don't. I just had a guy in the class with me (on another team) ask me how to check that the last four letters of a string are.xml in Java. He had about five or six nested loops (and he's on his sixth year of C. S.)
I also had a senior C. S. student ask me how to remove a directory in UNIX. Both she and her teammate trying to help her had no concept of present working directory. You can only imagine how ignorant they are about networking, compilers, etc.
We had two classes, Algorithms and Operating Systems, where our longest projects were two pages of really easy code (e. g. the Bounding Buffer problem with threads). Only once in Algorithms did we have to use loop invariants to show that our code worked, or compile and test our code. A lot of this was due to how little grasp of understanding these students have.
I do not, when I get in the field, want to work with people who are this incompetent.
Don't know the new CS majors here well enough to see if they're genuinely interested, but I hope to God they are.
Thanks, you brought up a lot of points that I would have brought up had I felt like writing at the time. Not pretty and commented can make a huge difference in a project of this scope. But they could use it to recreate it and get beyond any technical difficulties, but the work would still be on the order of months.
Everaldo's penguin is a little to trendy for my tastes. It also looks like a toy.
I actually think the logo is one of its strong points, by comparision. The four-color Windows logo and the MSN butterly are utterly stupid. The BSD logo some idiots find offensive. There is really nothing wrong with it.
And speaking of silly logos, have you seen Plan 9's bunny logo? Now that's just goony, but I do like the astronaut picture.
Ada doesn't have a very catchy logo either, all they have is a picture of Ada Lovelace. At least Linux has an actual logo and mascot.
But I guess I just disagree with you because I happen to have different tastes.
HP indemnifies its Linux users, provided they meet a few requirements, as shown here
You may already know this, but this is why I think SCO doesn't sue them:
Because of HP's indemnification, SCO's scare tactics are rendered ineffective. But I still think it was good for IBM to take a stand and say they don't need indemnification. But either way would have been fine.
They are already in over their head with IBM. Sure, that didn't stop them from suing Redhat, but Redhat is a much smaller company.
Both companies are in bed with Microsoft, though with this news, HP less so. HP makes many of the flagship windoze products (IPaq and Windows Media Center).
That being said, your post once again points out that SCO are stupid, litigous, hypocritical lying bastards. But they have been doing an impressive job of keeping their stock price at a relatively reasonable level. I can't believe they've dragged it out as long as they have.
Your experiences are roughly the same as mine, except I wasn't creative with my fake names. Using G. W. Bush, now that's funny.
That's nice that Albertson's lets you say you prefer not to give any info. Hopefully they keep it that way, but I kind of doubt it, after they started the card bullshit in the first place.
Oh well, I guess it's unavoidable now, unless you shop some place other than a supermarket.
Slashdot Mirror
I find this to be an invasion of my privacy. A personal letter with ads attached to it, based on the subject. If my girlfriend wrote a love letter, I could get an ad for roses. I would rather I just get regular ads. Sure, it may be what I want, but I don't want them to know what I'm thinking before they choose an ad for me.
I have found Google Adwords to be really annoying at times on the plain old web search as well. Sure, they're not images, but some of them are really abnoxious - not too different from typing in the wrong URL is sometimes typing in the wrong search terms.
Oops, I forgot. Slashdot doesn't show .sigs when you click Reply. Which makes it really hard to reply to .sigs (I've been guilty of that once or twice).
Unfortunately, I do not have that many geek friends (or friends at all, really *sigh*), just a few. If I did, I might check it out.
Yeah, but it will be spaghetti code, using type-unsafe macros. Have you looked at a custom GTK+ widget implementation in C before? It is some real ugly code.
So the only difference between QT and GTK from a language perspective is that with GTK you get a choice, QT you only get C++. (Not counting even higher languages such as C# since both have wrappers for that and are sort of equal)
Actually, there are a lot of bindings for Qt. PyQt, for instance. Many consider them to be superior to their GTK+ equivelents.
Writing something in C so it can have a lot of bindings is IMHO not the way to go. There should be other good reasons for writing it in C. You can always add a C interface to it, even one that doesn't use sockets. And many high-level languages have their binding interfaces specifically designed to support C++.
Oooh, porn popups to try and influence the presidential election by draining campaign contributions. Very funny. But really, do you expect that to put a dent in Bush's $1,000,000? And you don't want any swing voters trying to help out in this way and getting sucked in by Bush's evil lies.
Or better yet, learn Ocaml. Up with the best of lisp compilers in terms of speed. Has all the stuff to teach about functional programming, but still allows for iterative programming. Makes clear distinction between mutable data and immutable data.
You are a complete fucking idiot. Fortran is the same way, and has been around longer, I believe.
"Fresh Fruit"=~s/r/l/g;
You're just substituting letters - use tr or y, and then you can leave the g off:
"Fresh Fruit"=~tr/r/l/;
"Fresh Fruit"=~y/r/l/;
Don't know if yours is actually slower, but I thought I'd point it out.
No need to post the article's text. Sure, Yahoo has pop-ups, but you can block them. And I don't think they got slashdotted.
How about the new version of Photoshop, that tries to prevent people from printing out conterfeit bills? Now that is deliberately not doing something, and is very different from adding or removing a feature designed for the user in a program.
Now that is funny. Doesn't compile, but that's even better. I would just give him the code and have to run. Then he would ask the next guy how to do it, and they'd his mess of code, and get a laugh. Maybe even pick on him some more.
But what about Perl and Python? They're open source, but the vast majority of them just use releases from the main project. They have successful forks, which in my opinion, do not take away from the main project, they just provide new ways to use it.
And I actually think it will become irrelevant. I think that in the near future there will be a better language for doing what people do with Java that will run on top of Parrot. I really have high hopes for parrot, and think that it may be as big of an advance in computing as C, Linux, and Perl. Parrot is really a fantastic project.
By the way, I have seen you lurking here before, and have visited your website. It is most excellent.
And if they gave Linux users a chance to hack on it, perhaps the performance gap between Java on Linux and Java on Windows would be erased (although it's mostly gone now, and what would really help it are better graphics drivers/toolkits, and open sourcing Java wouldn't necessarily help any of these).
I agree. I would have preferred a Software Engineering program myself. They need to split it up a bit. Or I just need to go to a school that can have a real computer science, computer engineering, and software engineering program.
Yeah, you are actually getting your money's worth. I feel like I've just wasted months of time and thousands of dollars. From my point of view, you're the lucky bastard.
A lot of people found it terribly confusing. I found it quite natural. But I guess that's just because I spend so much time fiddling around with my Linux Distribution, (Gentoo, with a lot of kernel recompiling and other customizations put into it), and I already understood multithreading and IPC that makes all these programs work.
That said, your post, and the post about the crypto guys, opened my mind quite a bit, and I realize that some people are smarter than I think.
I'm a guy who tries to learn many nuances and aspects of programs and software, because I'm a linguist and a usability guy. But I also focus on broader concepts, such as saving user's time, preventing bugs, and integration. I guess I'm more of a software engineer than a computer scientist.
True. This could also be taken care of by a decent consulting service. I may give starting one of these a shot, but I'd probably have to find a big way of showing that I can code before I can get my first job. Maybe if I hack away at Parrot or something.
I also had a senior C. S. student ask me how to remove a directory in UNIX. Both she and her teammate trying to help her had no concept of present working directory. You can only imagine how ignorant they are about networking, compilers, etc.
We had two classes, Algorithms and Operating Systems, where our longest projects were two pages of really easy code (e. g. the Bounding Buffer problem with threads). Only once in Algorithms did we have to use loop invariants to show that our code worked, or compile and test our code. A lot of this was due to how little grasp of understanding these students have.
I do not, when I get in the field, want to work with people who are this incompetent.
Don't know the new CS majors here well enough to see if they're genuinely interested, but I hope to God they are.
Thanks, you brought up a lot of points that I would have brought up had I felt like writing at the time. Not pretty and commented can make a huge difference in a project of this scope. But they could use it to recreate it and get beyond any technical difficulties, but the work would still be on the order of months.
I actually think the logo is one of its strong points, by comparision. The four-color Windows logo and the MSN butterly are utterly stupid. The BSD logo some idiots find offensive. There is really nothing wrong with it.
And speaking of silly logos, have you seen Plan 9's bunny logo? Now that's just goony, but I do like the astronaut picture.
Ada doesn't have a very catchy logo either, all they have is a picture of Ada Lovelace. At least Linux has an actual logo and mascot.
But I guess I just disagree with you because I happen to have different tastes.
You may already know this, but this is why I think SCO doesn't sue them:
That being said, your post once again points out that SCO are stupid, litigous, hypocritical lying bastards. But they have been doing an impressive job of keeping their stock price at a relatively reasonable level. I can't believe they've dragged it out as long as they have.
Or if you shop at Super Wal-Mart, which I'm not a fan of. (I worked at Wal-Mart for a summer. it sucked ass.)
That's nice that Albertson's lets you say you prefer not to give any info. Hopefully they keep it that way, but I kind of doubt it, after they started the card bullshit in the first place.
Oh well, I guess it's unavoidable now, unless you shop some place other than a supermarket.
That is a cool feature, actually. Thank you for pointing that out.