How do you think it is not a substantive limitation?
My phone runs linux and is not x86 of any shape or register size, nor is my workstation, nor are many other machines I have running linux.
Because it would not be a substantive limitation for any genuine candidate for a ZFS deploy. Your phone or workstation are not those candidates... nor -- I'd be willing to bet -- are the highly unspecific "many other machines you have running linux"
... Go would be perfect if it also allowed for *some* manual memory management along with garbage collection. A large part of java's complexity that I see in big server type situations (> 8 G heap size) is that managing the gc parameters is almost a full time job. this is the theory and set of options you need to learn and internalize to get semi-satisfactory behavior from Sun's jdk1.5 gc. The complexity has only increased.... not decreased in later jdk's.
As a whole yes, but there's a great deal of variety. Here in Seattle we're the only major city in the nation to actually be in compliance to the Kyoto protocol and we've made great strides at reducing the water consumption. We use less water now than we did 20 years ago, even though the population has gone up significantly since then. We also lead the nation in gas mileage.
Yes. The one thing Seattle is hurting for is water.
Actually I did personally review Zoho project management and CRM products in comparison to what else is out there, and found that not only were they sub-standard, but their marketing materials and awards claimed to have won were borderline fraudulent.
(The thread is long dead but I'll post this to fight the baseless FUD for google searches and such.)
Could you be a bit more vague please. "what else is out there" ?? What is it that's out there. What did you compare exactly. How come your comparisons reached conclusions that *NO* third-party reviewers have reached? Pardon me sir, but your agenda is showing.
Go ahead, let them cheat. They'll be paying for it once they get a job based on their "degree" and suddenly realize they don't know fuckall about what they're doing.
From TFA: “Copying homework is a leading indicator of becoming a business major,”
So you disagree with my opinion, state that you really don't have one of your own, and if I want evidence to back your baseless opinion, I have to find it myself?
Thanks.
Did you actually clock on the review link that I provided as a sample ? The reviewer there is clearly in favor of Zoho over google docs. I have done my research and provided you a sample review. You have done no such thing. Have *you* done a thorough comparative review of the products yourself. If not, can you cite a review by *anybody* who will trash Zoho's software the way you describe.
And Zoho products show it. They are poor quality knock-offs of other, more commercially popular packages
As far as I know, Zoho are the best reviewed of *ALL* the online office apps. What is this superior package that you speak of ? Name it. Then show me a comparative review (other than your own baseless rantings) that supports your statement.
I do think he has a point that a degree in anything doesn't mean you're going to be any good, and I learned a heck of a lot of programming back in the 80's on my own, in my basement.
But, the motive here seems to be cost, not anything else.
And Zoho products show it. They are poor quality knock-offs of other, more commercially popular packages.
The are the Rodger Corman of software.
(Apologies to Mr Corman)
I call bullshit on that. I've never used Zoho or other online Office type apps much but from all the reviews, reactions etc. that I've read... Zoho seems to be doing pretty well. The irony is all the more acute since the most frequent comparison point for Zoho apps is the google docs suite (with their army of Phd's)... and pretty much every review I see comes out favoring Zoho's functionality, easy of use etc. etc. I won't quote each and every review here (you can do a google (hah) search on "Zoho vs google docs" and check for yourself). But here's one recent review as a "for instance": http://www.brighthub.com/computing/windows-platform/articles/54291.aspx
. . etc...
Once the java manufacturing association fixes the syntax to my satisfaction, I'd give up on my 10 GL super auto functional metaprogrammers language (Saufml) and start writing java code. Until then, I'll keep working on my latest NoSql data-store for my soon to be mobile-social-media-empire (leveraging P2P crowd-sourcing) in my beloved Saufml.
Or is it just that people are throwing consistency out of the window and saying "We can afford to lose a couple of records or have a couple of dangling references here and there, as long as it SCALES". Because I can build something that scales if it doesn't have to maintain ACID, too. The difficulty is in having _both_ ACID and scalability.
That's exactly right. To any experienced server engineer/architect, it's obvious that much greater scaling -- both horizontal (automatic sharding of data across nodes) and vertical (more writes/second/node -- can be achieved if you give up the absolute guarantee of zero data loss (...while still usually keeping data *consistency* in the non-lost portion of the data). Many of the social networking type applications... twitter, facebook and the likes, can probably afford that risk. Given that... you can do many many more txns/s with key-value type database instead of the transactionally oriented OLTP type databases. Now, for a smaller organization (shoe-string startups and such), the RDBMS model still has many benefits that can't be ignored --- vast "googleable" knowledge base behind the traditional software products, larger candidate pool with expertise in said systems etc. Unfortunately there really is no standard answer here other than evaluate your own situation carefully and make up your mind based on all data (most of which is available only to you).
Congrats US citizens! You're on your way to a non-broken health care system!
We could only be so lucky. This bill by and large doesn't change anything. Most of us have health insurance that we purchase through our employers, provided by insanely profitable corporations. And for almost none of us will that change.
Unfortunately our government doesn't do change this year.
it's easy to be armchair cynics and dismiss the whole thing with the wave of a hand. And since this is the slashdot of today, full of ideological blowhards with little depth of knowledge or any kind of real expertise behind their blathering, it's even easy to get modded really high for such comments. The truth is, if there was indeed nothing changing here, you wouldn't have seen the nastiest, dirtiest fear mongering campaigns that were ever unleashed against any piece of legislation. If you are really interested in knowing how it changes things, start here:
But of course if (as is likely) all you're interested in is to hold on tight to your pre-conceived notions, feel free to keep your eyes tightly shut, clap your hands to your ears and keep on singing naah-nah-nah-naah-nah for as long as you like.
its globalization. america has to come to terms with the age of globalization, especially after forcing many countries to come to terms with it itself.
No we don't. It's just embarrassing after we shoved it down other peoples' throats.
"No we don't" or "No I won't" ? You can personally decide to live in denial for as long as you wish of course... don't pretend you speak for the rest of us !!
Whereas the standard library of a language might specify how threads are available to client applications (programs written in the language), it's best left to the implementation (runtime or compiler) to decide how to translate those threads onto the machine.
No. If you really care about performance (and my job involves caring a lot about performance), it's *not* necessarily best to let the implementation to decide how to handle threading. Not with the ubiquitous multi-core "SMP" systems -- which are anything *but* symmetric when it comes to memory accesses from different cores on different physical chips. Going to the kernel for thread switching and lock contention can be super-linearly more expensive with the number of cores. (I would make an exception there about systems like Apple's libdispatch which, at least in theory, can work directly with the kernel and with deep knowledge of the hardware architecture to schedule my work over the appropriate cores... but that's not we're talking about with a relatively high level language like Go). I haven't looked carefully into Go, but in fact your assertion that it allows me to choose M:N threading (with perhaps tunable M and N), makes me want to find out more about this. And if, as some others here have asserted, it combines elements of python and C while adding concurrency in the syntax of the language, that's just about the perfect combination of features a bread and butter engineer like myself would be looking for, as opposed to other languages (Erlang et al), that may contain similar multi-processing goodness (message passing between light-weight tasks etc.) but are too far removed from the popular programming paradigms of the day to make them practical in a general-purpose programming context.
I'm sure the iPad will find an audience and will sell by the truckload, but come on...are they really claiming that people won't pay for a netbook, but they will pay the same price for something with half the functionality and none of the openness, just because it's pretty?
Do YOU want to die for the Kuomintang? If so, share why, and share why Americans should want their sons and daughters to die too?
I can't think of how to explain global power politics to you in a short slashdot post. Maybe you should start by buying an actual globe and marking out all the US military bases around the world on that. Much of that that information is known if not explicitly published.
To put it a bit more explicitly -- No, the US support for Taiwan is not about "caring" for Taiwanese people. It's more or less a huge, non-floating aircraft-carrier available for American use in case of trouble.
However, I think that right should be created by proper modification to copyright law, not by using class-action law to make an end run around the legislative system to create a monopoly on Google's behalf
That would be the right position to take if the legislative systems the world over were not simply puppets of Disney when it came to IP laws. If you think that an actual piece of legislation diluting the copyright holder's powers in any shape or form could get through, say, the US congress, you've not been paying attention. I'd rather prefer the "public square" approach that google has taken to bring some sanity to this process.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmm... 2.6.32. Did they fix this bug:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16991
Awesome... Awesome... Awesome....
What's intimidating?
Being a hobbyist OSS developer and getting hit with a patent infringement lawsuit from a large corporation.
bill_mcgonigle -- what you're doing here is the very definition of FUD.
How do you think it is not a substantive limitation?
My phone runs linux and is not x86 of any shape or register size, nor is my workstation, nor are many other machines I have running linux.
Because it would not be a substantive limitation for any genuine candidate for a ZFS deploy. Your phone or workstation are not those candidates... nor -- I'd be willing to bet -- are the highly unspecific "many other machines you have running linux"
...
... Go would be perfect if it also allowed for *some* manual memory management along with garbage collection. A large part of java's complexity that I see in big server type situations (> 8 G heap size) is that managing the gc parameters is almost a full time job. this is the theory and set of options you need to learn and internalize to get semi-satisfactory behavior from Sun's jdk1.5 gc. The complexity has only increased.... not decreased in later jdk's.
As a whole yes, but there's a great deal of variety. Here in Seattle we're the only major city in the nation to actually be in compliance to the Kyoto protocol and we've made great strides at reducing the water consumption. We use less water now than we did 20 years ago, even though the population has gone up significantly since then. We also lead the nation in gas mileage.
Yes. The one thing Seattle is hurting for is water.
Actually I did personally review Zoho project management and CRM products in comparison to what else is out there, and found that not only were they sub-standard, but their marketing materials and awards claimed to have won were borderline fraudulent.
(The thread is long dead but I'll post this to fight the baseless FUD for google searches and such.)
Could you be a bit more vague please. "what else is out there" ?? What is it that's out there. What did you compare exactly. How come your comparisons reached conclusions that *NO* third-party reviewers have reached? Pardon me sir, but your agenda is showing.
Go ahead, let them cheat. They'll be paying for it once they get a job based on their "degree" and suddenly realize they don't know fuckall about what they're doing.
From TFA:
“Copying homework is a leading indicator of becoming a business major,”
I leave the punchlines to the public....
So you disagree with my opinion, state that you really don't have one of your own, and if I want evidence to back your baseless opinion, I have to find it myself?
Thanks.
Did you actually clock on the review link that I provided as a sample ? The reviewer there is clearly in favor of Zoho over google docs. I have done my research and provided you a sample review. You have done no such thing. Have *you* done a thorough comparative review of the products yourself. If not, can you cite a review by *anybody* who will trash Zoho's software the way you describe.
And Zoho products show it. They are poor quality knock-offs of other, more commercially popular packages
As far as I know, Zoho are the best reviewed of *ALL* the online office apps. What is this superior package that you speak of ? Name it. Then show me a comparative review (other than your own baseless rantings) that supports your statement.
Any other reason? Perhaps they are a bit cheaper?
I do think he has a point that a degree in anything doesn't mean you're going to be any good, and I learned a heck of a lot of programming back in the 80's on my own, in my basement.
But, the motive here seems to be cost, not anything else.
And Zoho products show it. They are poor quality knock-offs of other, more commercially popular packages.
The are the Rodger Corman of software.
(Apologies to Mr Corman)
I call bullshit on that. I've never used Zoho or other online Office type apps much but from all the reviews, reactions etc. that I've read... Zoho seems to be doing pretty well. The irony is all the more acute since the most frequent comparison point for Zoho apps is the google docs suite (with their army of Phd's)... and pretty much every review I see comes out favoring Zoho's functionality, easy of use etc. etc. I won't quote each and every review here (you can do a google (hah) search on "Zoho vs google docs" and check for yourself). But here's one recent review as a "for instance": http://www.brighthub.com/computing/windows-platform/articles/54291.aspx
Got it. No C++ on the Internet. Someone might see my privates.
No.. only you 'friends' may see your privates.
... as long as it never rains.
The problem with Java today is... it's syntax looks too much like C. And as everybody knows, C is for geezers. Can't we write java code as follows:
<class>
<classname>MyPony</classname>
<method>Run</method>
<code>
<if><condition>IsExcited</conditon>
<if_block>walkFaster </if_block>
</if>
<method>trot</method>
<method>gallop</gallop>
.
.
etc...
Once the java manufacturing association fixes the syntax to my satisfaction, I'd give up on my 10 GL super auto functional metaprogrammers language (Saufml) and start writing java code. Until then, I'll keep working on my latest NoSql data-store for my soon to be mobile-social-media-empire (leveraging P2P crowd-sourcing) in my beloved Saufml.
Or is it just that people are throwing consistency out of the window and saying "We can afford to lose a couple of records or have a couple of dangling references here and there, as long as it SCALES". Because I can build something that scales if it doesn't have to maintain ACID, too. The difficulty is in having _both_ ACID and scalability.
That's exactly right. To any experienced server engineer/architect, it's obvious that much greater scaling -- both horizontal (automatic sharding of data across nodes) and vertical (more writes/second/node -- can be achieved if you give up the absolute guarantee of zero data loss (...while still usually keeping data *consistency* in the non-lost portion of the data). Many of the social networking type applications... twitter, facebook and the likes, can probably afford that risk. Given that... you can do many many more txns/s with key-value type database instead of the transactionally oriented OLTP type databases. Now, for a smaller organization (shoe-string startups and such), the RDBMS model still has many benefits that can't be ignored --- vast "googleable" knowledge base behind the traditional software products, larger candidate pool with expertise in said systems etc. Unfortunately there really is no standard answer here other than evaluate your own situation carefully and make up your mind based on all data (most of which is available only to you).
Wonko the Sane writes:
1) Nothing
2) Nothing
3) They won't
Oh the irony of that name....
So the bill will drive the doctors away from the health care industry ? To what ? The film industry ?
Congrats US citizens! You're on your way to a non-broken health care system!
We could only be so lucky. This bill by and large doesn't change anything. Most of us have health insurance that we purchase through our employers, provided by insanely profitable corporations. And for almost none of us will that change.
Unfortunately our government doesn't do change this year.
it's easy to be armchair cynics and dismiss the whole thing with the wave of a hand. And since this is the slashdot of today, full of ideological blowhards with little depth of knowledge or any kind of real expertise behind their blathering, it's even easy to get modded really high for such comments. The truth is, if there was indeed nothing changing here, you wouldn't have seen the nastiest, dirtiest fear mongering campaigns that were ever unleashed against any piece of legislation. If you are really interested in knowing how it changes things, start here:
http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/what-you-get-when-hcr-passes
But of course if (as is likely) all you're interested in is to hold on tight to your pre-conceived notions, feel free to keep your eyes tightly shut, clap your hands to your ears and keep on singing naah-nah-nah-naah-nah for as long as you like.
its globalization. america has to come to terms with the age of globalization, especially after forcing many countries to come to terms with it itself.
No we don't. It's just embarrassing after we shoved it down other peoples' throats.
"No we don't" or "No I won't" ? You can personally decide to live in denial for as long as you wish of course... don't pretend you speak for the rest of us !!
Oh... so that's what the kids are calling it these days... ??
No. If you really care about performance (and my job involves caring a lot about performance), it's *not* necessarily best to let the implementation to decide how to handle threading. Not with the ubiquitous multi-core "SMP" systems -- which are anything *but* symmetric when it comes to memory accesses from different cores on different physical chips. Going to the kernel for thread switching and lock contention can be super-linearly more expensive with the number of cores. (I would make an exception there about systems like Apple's libdispatch which, at least in theory, can work directly with the kernel and with deep knowledge of the hardware architecture to schedule my work over the appropriate cores... but that's not we're talking about with a relatively high level language like Go). I haven't looked carefully into Go, but in fact your assertion that it allows me to choose M:N threading (with perhaps tunable M and N), makes me want to find out more about this. And if, as some others here have asserted, it combines elements of python and C while adding concurrency in the syntax of the language, that's just about the perfect combination of features a bread and butter engineer like myself would be looking for, as opposed to other languages (Erlang et al), that may contain similar multi-processing goodness (message passing between light-weight tasks etc.) but are too far removed from the popular programming paradigms of the day to make them practical in a general-purpose programming context.
This is such crap.
I'm sure the iPad will find an audience and will sell by the truckload, but come on...are they really claiming that people won't pay for a netbook, but they will pay the same price for something with half the functionality and none of the openness, just because it's pretty?
Yes. And they're right.
What kind of women are they interviewing?
Imaginary.
That's perfect. Exactly the kind of women most slashdotters "date".
I can't think of how to explain global power politics to you in a short slashdot post. Maybe you should start by buying an actual globe and marking out all the US military bases around the world on that. Much of that that information is known if not explicitly published.
To put it a bit more explicitly -- No, the US support for Taiwan is not about "caring" for Taiwanese people. It's more or less a huge, non-floating aircraft-carrier available for American use in case of trouble.
That would be the right position to take if the legislative systems the world over were not simply puppets of Disney when it came to IP laws. If you think that an actual piece of legislation diluting the copyright holder's powers in any shape or form could get through, say, the US congress, you've not been paying attention. I'd rather prefer the "public square" approach that google has taken to bring some sanity to this process.