Among primitive man, nobody who lived very long was a vegetarian, and nobody had the luxury of buying their meat already killed and cleanly presented in the supermarket. If they didn't kill the animal themselves, they knew who did. Indian culture is vegetarian (India indians, not native americans). As they are the second most populated country with around 800 million habitants (or almost a billion as americans call them) I would say that you can be vegetarian, live long and procriate. On top of that mankind has another source of proteins that doesnt involve hunting. Man started domesticating animals thousands of years ago.
C# was built by Anders Hejlsberg, who designed Pascal, and Delphi last time i checked, pascal was designed by nicklaus wirth, who also designed between others modula 2 and a wacky OS they use in his current university (zurich?) Delphi had as concept base pascal, and pascal in borland turbo pascal compilers imported the "modules and other nice stuff" from modula2 do pascal. Somewhere along the line something called object pascal appeared, but dunno who the credit goes to on that one. google for more info, im too lazy
I cannot understand this... really, cannot! Just how fucking big is the propatent lobby to subvert the European Parlament iniciatives. We are seeing the democratic representatives of the european parlament being stepped out, without any chance to do anything else but protest! If this is the way Europe is going to work, I begin to get very scared!
There should be more people active in this discussion. I think it dimishes our democracys (in europe) if we allow for the Europe Council circunvent the vote and opinio of the democratically elected European Parlament. There should be enough geeks * near the strings of power to make those in power aware of their needs. If that is not the case, we have to make enough noise until we are heard and the European Parlament Directives get aproved
Back when ps2 was state of the art, i couldnt help but think (as I've expressed in some other post lost somewhere around/.) that if sony ha allowed for linux4ps2 to evolve and mature, ps2's would abound by now. If they allow independent development for other systems, manage to have a good chip (which i think they already have) add optional keyboard/mouse/dvi out, they could easily stick in the computer market. Hell, i would use a ps3 for programming if it allowed it and had a nice pricetag cost(=500Eur)
The main problem with HOA's is that they tend to get populated with exactly the wrong kind of people. Who runs for the HOA offices? People with too much free time that like to stick their noses in other people's business. This thought pattern is really hard to overcome and root out once it gets in there, and most people don't realize who's running until it's too late. The busybodies will form a voting block, and the rest of the neighborhood will be just disorganized enough to not be able to get them out. That's when things go to shit.
Thats democracy... put it nation wide and you will end up... who knows, electing bush?
each quarter 90 days, 10 weeks of 9 days each, 2 weekend days, (only 6 or 7 working hours per day) the remaining 5/6 days a year, for celebration, why not from the last 2/3 days of each year to the first 2? workforce total = current model 52weeks * 5 workdays * 8 hours = 2080 hours year new model 4 quarters * 10 weeks * 7 workdays *7 hours = 1960 hours a year
As for vacations, why not 4 weeks a year: 4*7 = 28days a year. that is exactly what you get on best countries.
(non european countries will probably think that is not enough work a year, but let me tell you its about the same we get now)
a year would be something like: free week during new year celebration -5/6 days workyear - 360 days, 4 quarters, 40 weeks (I did a nice ascii art for it, but/. said i was using to many junk characters)
Yet another calendar? sure, make it a well designed one, that way we will suffer none of the current ones problems.
I also would like a "change in regime" to something better worldwise. but we can leave that for later;)
better weather:) Seriously, it's about the same thing, both meet the requirements. Knowing both cultures I can only say in spain it would be more fun doing it.
And why, in your opinion, is france so much better as a site?
As far as i remember, the only reason europe presented just 1 application, was so not having 2 different applications fighting against each other. It was far more important to get it than to be particularly france or spain. (if the US administration is reading this, that is called cooperation, of the international kind)
After reading TFA, what happens is Europe and partners, really want to go ahead with this and will do it alone if necessary. (basicaly they gave japan until end of year to decide) I agree completely on the urgence, because there is already scientific proof, that the concept would work. The technology only needs to scale up, and prove itself, before using it massively. (to get +- infinitum energy). That is a "good thing"tm.
With all the problems from a oil-dependent economy (with some of its problems discussed all around this thread), moving to a clean, cheap, source of energy is the way to go. Then we wouldnt even argue about CO2 or kioto treaty. Of course it would be so fucking good, that many of the presures on the whole capitalistic, global economy, would be gone, and conspiration teories abound. But that (getting a cheap, clean source of energy) really needs to happen if we are to make the world a better place, for us and latter generations.
EU executive comission only wants to go forward, fast, and if possible with japans approval and support: "A central feature of a consensus would be a genuine partnership between the EU and Japan,"
So if europe rather go alone than wait for ever to do it, they have my aproval both as an european and as a citizen of the world. If japan wants to join it would be even better, and i'm sure there's enough research to be done by both.
second language should be? Second? why limit to 2? I started with portuguese/spanish, english at 9, french at 11. I learnt italian only by watching tv and speaking, and russian in 6 months. As someone said, its like computer languages, the more you know, the better you can use the existing "language structure" to learn a new one and be on the look for the subtleties.
In my not so humble opinion, you're welcome. Never thought you deserved to be so close to USA.:) On the other hand, we should kick out UK from EU and let it get in north american treaties. (just to be a fair exchange):)
(-1 flamebait) (You've been warned, dont bite unless you want too)
That kind of talk, was beginning when I started studing computers in the 90's. The saying was, as it was "the thing" everyone was going to study, in 10 years we would achieve saturation of the market. I wasnt afraid then, because i always thought the good ones will always get jobs. (and im not so humble)
The thing is, the market saturated, and for the first time in history, computer people have to actually look for a job, instead of choosing a job (that was the scenario when i finally graduated in computer science engineering. Companys would pay higher and higher just to get one guy. jumping from job to job you could double the pay in one year)
Am I afraid? Still not. Why? Because computers are the way to go. There will be always need to have programers. At least untill we reach the idilic society where everything is done automatically. Until the day I "think" of getting a strawberry filled cookie and one automagically appears in front of me, there will always be work for programmers. There are still hundrets of unsolved problems, and all the solved ones can always be improved. Thats why I think extinction is not anytime soon.
The trend is to have more and more programmers. As with everything, not all of them will get an easy job like in the nineties. But thats the way all the other jobs worked until now. Whatever other thing you study, you need to find your place in the market, be it medicine, art, or (yuk) law school(*).
Programmers will be rendered useless after we reach "REAL" AI. At that time, any AI computer will be able to program better than us, and reprogram itself to be better and better at it exponentially (and faster). But then again, it will be able to do just about anything better than us, so its not only programmers than have to worry. Ideally, when we reach that stage, we will be smart enough to let it do all the work for everyone and live in an utopial system. Not sure the institutionalized powers will allow that though.
(*) law school teaches us that there is another way to keep a "class" from extinction. We have far more lawyers than should be needed, but lawyers themselves create the market for their jobs passing more and more stupid laws so they keep having their jobs despite more people coming from law school. I hope we dont go that way, but it would be easy to keep our jobs... just place some nasty time trigered bug bombs in the code and "voila":)
Youre just assuming he doesnt want to do that. He says he wants. I know i certainly wanted. Ended up using postgresql and arrays. Not the best thing around (mostly, because arrays are very limited in pgsql)
I think that is the reason people are asking the question "Could there be something BETTER than SQL" Because the more you use it, the more you get into situations where complicate/extravagant solutions are reached because complicate/extravagant problems demand them.
I believe there could be something better. And I know a lot of people in academic research are thinking about it. Maybe someone somewhere even had good ideas. But good ideas without a good common implementation are wortless.
Because lets face it, the real power behind SQL is not the "already proven dumb" null value, nor the Query Language. Its the STANDARD part of it that makes it powerfull. (even if in the end its not so standart and not so powerfull)
I'll start by agreeing most times nulls will be a long term PITA waiting to happen.
Their worst property is absortion. Every operation you perform on a null (other than the Is null test:))) will return a null. That can lead (and I already saw that happen several times) to nasty errors, which could be easily avoided. The most disturbing being, that in most places where a null was being used, there was actually better info to put there that null. That said, and with the above disclaimer, that nulls can be dangerous, there are also situations where they represent a valid, logic solution to a problem.
Just on the top of my head: You have a record with a field (payed in: date) something popular in invoices. WTF do you put there before the thing is payed? A stupid predefined date? that makes even less sense than a null.
Another example is when something is both optional (may or may not have a value) but each of the values needs to be unique. I have already encountered examples of this. Only way of solving it is with nulls.
adding it all up: yes, nulls are dangerous, mostly because their implementation with absortion propertys gives nasty coding errors, and because a lot of people use/allow nulls where there isnt really a need to, and a predefined value would be better. But sometimes it makes sense to have a "no value" value. Its like undef on programming.
I have NRTFA, so i dont know how well this will go on topic, but then again, I think i understand about nulls:)
Man! I hope all the "climate is not warming up" Zealots look at the graph with care... Even if they were exagerated (as some CINWU zealot before me posted) They are spooky! I'm afraid at this rate will reach armageddeon soon...
the world is at least a little bit safer without Saddam Hussein in charge in Iraq I'm totally positive the world would be a safer place without bush and similar right wing nuts running the bigest army around... Does that intitle me to go to war against USA?
hehe... Its fun to see how incredibly convinced of yourself you seem to be. a US v. Europe conflict would be over very quickly.
Dreamer!!!
The only way you could end rapidly such kind of war, would be to nuke everything. And i dont think you could do that without destroying the whole world.
If you were to go there, you would have a lot of suprises.
You are having big trouble inposing yourselves in irak, a country with shitty arms. Try invadind... lets say... switzerland? a fully trained army, prepared to do guerrilla/mountain warfare, with all male citizens between 20 to 45 having their weapon of choice in home. They have anual military service, and have some of the best weapons money can buy.
Worst, you could never attack a european country without loosing your face to the rest of the world. Wanna bet china would take their chances on you at first opportunity?
C'mon, be serious, you might have the bigger army around nowadays... but just try to use it against someone who knows what they're doing...
Or do you think that taking out talibans in afganistan or deposing saddam was REAL WAR?
Try setting foot in Nort Korea. Small country, bad weapons... Conquering it would require thousands of deaths on your side.
Wha'eva... just had to say something... But you better get your facts straight when you think such an abomination (even the mere fact that you think that US would enter war with Europe is an abomination, which I understand only from a theoretical point of view)
As a sidenote, in one episode of "yes prime minister" i think from BBC, they where discussing tobaco, with anti-tabaco guys saying something like: "If you make the population stop smoking massively, you will have a lot less of cases of cancer and high cost treating diseases, saving a lot of money" To which the pro-tabaco guys replied: "Yeah, but if you do that, people will actually live longer, and the amount of money you will have to pay for extra old-age pensions will excede the savings in health care"
Just playing devils advocate here, to show you: a) Things are a lot more complex than what seems at first sight b) If you want a 100% capitalist society, whose only interest is "money" you will always have this kind of problems, because a lot of the "popular (for the people)" measures are not the best for the ones already-in-power, who have the money and will fight to retain their power/money
Slashdot Mirror
Among primitive man, nobody who lived very long was a vegetarian, and nobody had the luxury of buying their meat already killed and cleanly presented in the supermarket. If they didn't kill the animal themselves, they knew who did.
Indian culture is vegetarian (India indians, not native americans). As they are the second most populated country with around 800 million habitants (or almost a billion as americans call them) I would say that you can be vegetarian, live long and procriate.
On top of that mankind has another source of proteins that doesnt involve hunting. Man started domesticating animals thousands of years ago.
C# was built by Anders Hejlsberg, who designed Pascal, and Delphi
last time i checked, pascal was designed by nicklaus wirth, who also designed between others modula 2 and a wacky OS they use in his current university (zurich?)
Delphi had as concept base pascal, and pascal in borland turbo pascal compilers imported the "modules and other nice stuff" from modula2 do pascal.
Somewhere along the line something called object pascal appeared, but dunno who the credit goes to on that one.
google for more info, im too lazy
I cannot understand this... really, cannot!
Just how fucking big is the propatent lobby to subvert the European Parlament iniciatives.
We are seeing the democratic representatives of the european parlament being stepped out, without any chance to do anything else but protest!
If this is the way Europe is going to work, I begin to get very scared!
Patents have become a burden on actual innovators, slowing innovation, and a benefit for noone but lawyers.
Amen
There should be more people active in this discussion.
I think it dimishes our democracys (in europe) if we allow for the Europe Council circunvent the vote and opinio of the democratically elected European Parlament.
There should be enough geeks * near the strings of power to make those in power aware of their needs.
If that is not the case, we have to make enough noise until we are heard and the European Parlament Directives get aproved
* I use geek in the thecnological savvy meaning.
Back when ps2 was state of the art, i couldnt help but think (as I've expressed in some other post lost somewhere around /.) that if sony ha allowed for linux4ps2 to evolve and mature, ps2's would abound by now.
If they allow independent development for other systems, manage to have a good chip (which i think they already have) add optional keyboard/mouse/dvi out, they could easily stick in the computer market.
Hell, i would use a ps3 for programming if it allowed it and had a nice pricetag cost(=500Eur)
The main problem with HOA's is that they tend to get populated with exactly the wrong kind of people. Who runs for the HOA offices? People with too much free time that like to stick their noses in other people's business. This thought pattern is really hard to overcome and root out once it gets in there, and most people don't realize who's running until it's too late. The busybodies will form a voting block, and the rest of the neighborhood will be just disorganized enough to not be able to get them out. That's when things go to shit.
Thats democracy... put it nation wide and you will end up... who knows, electing bush?
I here ask all citizens of the earth to make the basis to the world-democratic calendar
/. said i was using to many junk characters)
;)
4 quarters, 1..4, forget summer, winter... climate is going crazy anyway
each quarter 90 days, 10 weeks of 9 days each, 2 weekend days, (only 6 or 7 working hours per day)
the remaining 5/6 days a year, for celebration, why not from the last 2/3 days of each year to the first 2?
workforce total =
current model
52weeks * 5 workdays * 8 hours = 2080 hours year
new model
4 quarters * 10 weeks * 7 workdays *7 hours = 1960 hours a year
As for vacations, why not 4 weeks a year:
4*7 = 28days a year.
that is exactly what you get on best countries.
(non european countries will probably think that is not enough work a year, but let me tell you its about the same we get now)
a year would be something like:
free week during new year celebration -5/6 days
workyear - 360 days, 4 quarters, 40 weeks
(I did a nice ascii art for it, but
Yet another calendar? sure, make it a well designed one, that way we will suffer none of the current ones problems.
I also would like a "change in regime" to something better worldwise. but we can leave that for later
better weather :)
Seriously, it's about the same thing, both meet the requirements.
Knowing both cultures I can only say in spain it would be more fun doing it.
And why, in your opinion, is france so much better as a site?
As far as i remember, the only reason europe presented just 1 application, was so not having 2 different applications fighting against each other. It was far more important to get it than to be particularly france or spain. (if the US administration is reading this, that is called cooperation, of the international kind)
After reading TFA, what happens is Europe and partners, really want to go ahead with this and will do it alone if necessary. (basicaly they gave japan until end of year to decide)
I agree completely on the urgence, because there is already scientific proof, that the concept would work. The technology only needs to scale up, and prove itself, before using it massively. (to get +- infinitum energy).
That is a "good thing"tm.
With all the problems from a oil-dependent economy (with some of its problems discussed all around this thread), moving to a clean, cheap, source of energy is the way to go.
Then we wouldnt even argue about CO2 or kioto treaty.
Of course it would be so fucking good, that many of the presures on the whole capitalistic, global economy, would be gone, and conspiration teories abound.
But that (getting a cheap, clean source of energy) really needs to happen if we are to make the world a better place, for us and latter generations.
EU executive comission only wants to go forward, fast, and if possible with japans approval and support:
"A central feature of a consensus would be a genuine partnership between the EU and Japan,"
So if europe rather go alone than wait for ever to do it, they have my aproval both as an european and as a citizen of the world. If japan wants to join it would be even better, and i'm sure there's enough research to be done by both.
But be quick,or be late.
second language should be?
Second? why limit to 2?
I started with portuguese/spanish, english at 9, french at 11. I learnt italian only by watching tv and speaking, and russian in 6 months.
As someone said, its like computer languages, the more you know, the better you can use the existing "language structure" to learn a new one and be on the look for the subtleties.
In my not so humble opinion, you're welcome. Never thought you deserved to be so close to USA. :) :)
On the other hand, we should kick out UK from EU and let it get in north american treaties. (just to be a fair exchange)
(-1 flamebait)
(You've been warned, dont bite unless you want too)
Not anywhere soon that is.
:)
That kind of talk, was beginning when I started studing computers in the 90's.
The saying was, as it was "the thing" everyone was going to study, in 10 years we would achieve saturation of the market.
I wasnt afraid then, because i always thought the good ones will always get jobs. (and im not so humble)
The thing is, the market saturated, and for the first time in history, computer people have to actually look for a job, instead of choosing a job (that was the scenario when i finally graduated in computer science engineering. Companys would pay higher and higher just to get one guy. jumping from job to job you could double the pay in one year)
Am I afraid? Still not. Why?
Because computers are the way to go. There will be always need to have programers. At least untill we reach the idilic society where everything is done automatically. Until the day I "think" of getting a strawberry filled cookie and one automagically appears in front of me, there will always be work for programmers.
There are still hundrets of unsolved problems, and all the solved ones can always be improved. Thats why I think extinction is not anytime soon.
The trend is to have more and more programmers. As with everything, not all of them will get an easy job like in the nineties. But thats the way all the other jobs worked until now. Whatever other thing you study, you need to find your place in the market, be it medicine, art, or (yuk) law school(*).
Programmers will be rendered useless after we reach "REAL" AI. At that time, any AI computer will be able to program better than us, and reprogram itself to be better and better at it exponentially (and faster). But then again, it will be able to do just about anything better than us, so its not only programmers than have to worry.
Ideally, when we reach that stage, we will be smart enough to let it do all the work for everyone and live in an utopial system. Not sure the institutionalized powers will allow that though.
(*) law school teaches us that there is another way to keep a "class" from extinction. We have far more lawyers than should be needed, but lawyers themselves create the market for their jobs passing more and more stupid laws so they keep having their jobs despite more people coming from law school.
I hope we dont go that way, but it would be easy to keep our jobs... just place some nasty time trigered bug bombs in the code and "voila"
Youre just assuming he doesnt want to do that. He says he wants. I know i certainly wanted. Ended up using postgresql and arrays. Not the best thing around (mostly, because arrays are very limited in pgsql)
I think that is the reason people are asking the question "Could there be something BETTER than SQL" Because the more you use it, the more you get into situations where complicate/extravagant solutions are reached because complicate/extravagant problems demand them.
I believe there could be something better. And I know a lot of people in academic research are thinking about it. Maybe someone somewhere even had good ideas. But good ideas without a good common implementation are wortless.
Because lets face it, the real power behind SQL is not the "already proven dumb" null value, nor the Query Language. Its the STANDARD part of it that makes it powerfull. (even if in the end its not so standart and not so powerfull)
I'll start by agreeing most times nulls will be a long term PITA waiting to happen.
:))) will return a null.
:)
Their worst property is absortion. Every operation you perform on a null (other than the Is null test
That can lead (and I already saw that happen several times) to nasty errors, which could be easily avoided. The most disturbing being, that in most places where a null was being used, there was actually better info to put there that null.
That said, and with the above disclaimer, that nulls can be dangerous, there are also situations where they represent a valid, logic solution to a problem.
Just on the top of my head:
You have a record with a field (payed in: date) something popular in invoices. WTF do you put there before the thing is payed? A stupid predefined date? that makes even less sense than a null.
Another example is when something is both optional (may or may not have a value) but each of the values needs to be unique. I have already encountered examples of this. Only way of solving it is with nulls.
adding it all up: yes, nulls are dangerous, mostly because their implementation with absortion propertys gives nasty coding errors, and because a lot of people use/allow nulls where there isnt really a need to, and a predefined value would be better. But sometimes it makes sense to have a "no value" value. Its like undef on programming.
I have NRTFA, so i dont know how well this will go on topic, but then again, I think i understand about nulls
Someone save us from the product of the US **SYSTEM**!
Or should that be:
Someone save us from the product of the **US**!!!?
Man! I hope all the "climate is not warming up" Zealots look at the graph with care... ...
Even if they were exagerated (as some CINWU zealot before me posted) They are spooky!
I'm afraid at this rate will reach armageddeon soon
the world is at least a little bit safer without Saddam Hussein in charge in Iraq
I'm totally positive the world would be a safer place without bush and similar right wing nuts running the bigest army around... Does that intitle me to go to war against USA?
You are forgetting the 710 main resons for choosing iraq against all other countrys you said:
Just turn 710 180 degrees and you'll get
OIL
Roughly what percent of your music collection would you have bought if you weren't able to download it?
0%
1) 0%
2) 0%
3) ?%
4) 70%
5) 30%
hehe...
Its fun to see how incredibly convinced of yourself you seem to be.
a US v. Europe conflict would be over very quickly.
Dreamer!!!
The only way you could end rapidly such kind of war, would be to nuke everything. And i dont think you could do that without destroying the whole world.
If you were to go there, you would have a lot of suprises.
You are having big trouble inposing yourselves in irak, a country with shitty arms.
Try invadind... lets say... switzerland? a fully trained army, prepared to do guerrilla/mountain warfare, with all male citizens between 20 to 45 having their weapon of choice in home. They have anual military service, and have some of the best weapons money can buy.
Worst, you could never attack a european country without loosing your face to the rest of the world. Wanna bet china would take their chances on you at first opportunity?
C'mon, be serious, you might have the bigger army around nowadays... but just try to use it against someone who knows what they're doing...
Or do you think that taking out talibans in afganistan or deposing saddam was REAL WAR?
Try setting foot in Nort Korea. Small country, bad weapons... Conquering it would require thousands of deaths on your side.
Wha'eva... just had to say something... But you better get your facts straight when you think such an abomination
(even the mere fact that you think that US would enter war with Europe is an abomination, which I understand only from a theoretical point of view)
As a sidenote, in one episode of "yes prime minister" i think from BBC, they where discussing tobaco, with anti-tabaco guys saying something like:
"If you make the population stop smoking massively, you will have a lot less of cases of cancer and high cost treating diseases, saving a lot of money"
To which the pro-tabaco guys replied:
"Yeah, but if you do that, people will actually live longer, and the amount of money you will have to pay for extra old-age pensions will excede the savings in health care"
Just playing devils advocate here, to show you:
a) Things are a lot more complex than what seems at first sight
b) If you want a 100% capitalist society, whose only interest is "money" you will always have this kind of problems, because a lot of the "popular (for the people)" measures are not the best for the ones already-in-power, who have the money and will fight to retain their power/money
Z
lol!
I mean, its sad... but the way you put it...
lol!
i find it funny how your parent poster wrote a total idiocracy and got +4 insightfull, while you explain everything correctly and dont get mod at all.
well, life's a bitch...