The major problem Java has is EJBs: everyone in Java-land seems to think that their problem requires solving using this pile of crap. A web application with persistence- ooh we'd better use EJBs then!
Swing _is_ rather unresponsive and slow unfortunately, due to it using no native widgets. This is solved by SWT, which mixes platform independence with use of native widgets where they exist. For this reason for example the popular Java IDE Eclipse (written with SWT) is much more responsive than Sun's IDE NetBeans.
But Intellij's IDEA is much more responsive than both NetBeans and Eclipse, and it's written with Swing. So it doesn't seem to me that Swing is necessarily the bottleneck.
The real problem with Swing is that you can get 80% of your functionality and user experience with VB-level effort. The remaining 20% can be so excruciating, that many developers just choose to ignore it.
OK. I reread the original posting. I read linked articles and letters from Nature. Oh, yeah, and I worked at the National Library of Medicine for two years.
Look, what makes this not worth discussing further is an arrogant, condescending tone, the assumption that non-scientists cannot understand something so close to the 'priesthood', and attempts to intentionally cloud, confuse and introduce unneeded complexity to the issue.
This is so much of a gross oversimplification it is scary.
Saying it's just business is a gross oversimplification. But saying such an oversimplification "is scary" is what put's the F in FUD.
I think we can greatly enhance the peer review process, ensure open access to the scientific literature and cut the costs, if we just develop the technology to do it.
I can only hope that this was irony, and I missed it. Can you possibly mean that lower priced journals are an unsolved technical problem?
I understand your point that the 'product' of the journals is not so much paper and ink, as an organized peer review process. But whether they are run as nonprofits or not, academic journals have a near monopolistic ability to extract rents that far exceed their costs.
I was under the impression that most primary and secondary schools and colleges and universities were run by local and state governments, or at least as nonprofit corporations.
If there's a secret plan to privatize education, Kerry better hope that the NEA doesn't find out.
It actually very difficult short a stock immediately after the IPO.
IIRC there are two issues that drive this.
First, and less important, is the settlement delay. The IPO must have settled before the shares can be loaned to a short seller. It is physically impossible to borrow shares to short during this time. Back in the day, this was three days, but I'm not sure how long it is now.
Second, is the unwillingness of IPO investors to loan their shares to short sellers. In general the buyers of an IPO are not eager to see the price driven down, and thus don't allow the stock to be borrowed and sold. They have this explicit control because in general IPO's are not marginable (generally 30 days must pass). Further, the holders of the IPO know this, and they will do their best to crush you in a short squeeze.
(Rereading your post I see you said 'a couple of weeks'. Oh well. Never mind.)
The copyright, that is, the right to copy a particular work, creates a government sponsored private monopoly on creating and distributing copies of that particular work.
If there is a demand for a copy of the work at a particular price, we can assume that the value of the right to create that copy is no less than the price less the copying costs.
That measurable and concrete dollar (or euro) amount is what has been taken.
Of course this leads to the argument that there is no taking, if there is no demand at the market price. That is, "XXXX loses no money, because I never would have bought the CD at that price anyway."
Needless to say, at a market price equal to the cost of copying demand increases dramatically, just as the profit to the copyright holder drops. But due to the exclusivity of the monopoly, it is the sole discretion of the copyright holder to decide the market price, and thus the level of demand.
the sudan is a far more compelling case for crimes against humanity. but they are basically off the map.
I don't think that's accurate. What's new is the interest the news media has shown of late.
Under Clinton, the US bombed what it believed to be a chemical weapons plant (erroneously, it seems), and used political pressure to force the Sudanese to expel Osama bin Laden. (As "Frontline" put it, in hindsight, this was possibly the worst move since Lenin was put on the special train out of Zurich.)
Under Bush, the US sent John Danforth as a special peace envoy in September 2001. In November 2001, citing human rights abuses, the US unilaterally imposed sanctions on the Sudan, after the UN lifted them in in September 2001.
In terms of humanitarian aid over the past four years the the United States has delivered more aid than all other countries combined.
These policies may not be your cup of tea, but please don't project the news media's attention deficit disorder onto the administration.
All the Microsoft developers are secretly rewriting MS Office in C#.NET.
As soon as the Mono guys finish the hard part of the Linux port, MS will abandon Windows, fork Linux and start selling MS Linux bundled w/ Mono (and of course, Firefox with the new IE theme), and MS Office for Linux.
I've been using IntelliJ IDEA for Java apps for about the past two years, and just recently started doing C#/.NET.
I found VS.Net usable, but pretty unimpressive. The ReSharper Add-in from IntelliJ makes it a little more pleasant, But I think it could come a long way.
In fairness to VS.Net, comparing it to IDEA is rough. IntelliJ IDEA is possibly the best piece of application software I've ever used. (In my limited experience Mathematica is it's only competition, in terms of astonishing, but never surprising behaviour.) In IDE's, Eclipse is pretty good, especially at the price, but feels about one major release behind IDEA.
I don't believe he claims definitive proof. You only have to read a few of the posts in this thread to understand his mindset -- I imagine he was annoyed by C++ chauvinists dismissing Java as orders of magintude worse in performance than C++. It simply isn't.
Over the past year I've been in more than one interview where C++ experts (and these were talented guys) just had no idea about where Java was. It was as if they had written a 'Hello World' applet in 1997 or maybe dabbled with Visual J++ a few years later and wrote the language off permanently as a toy language.
It used to bother me. But now I realize that they're the ones with the problem.
Re:The author has some articles on nested classes.
on
Hardcore Java
·
· Score: 1
I don't know. Almost every time I make an anonymous inner class for a JButton I end up extracting it to a nested class so I can also use it for a JMenuItem. But, to each his own...
I'm cool with that, but make the enclosing class implement ActionListener? That's so Java 1.
Re:The author has some articles on nested classes.
on
Hardcore Java
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Actually, I think his comments on anonymous inner classes are pretty awful. In particular he makes two pretty bad points.
First he claims that anonymous inner classes are not 'mainstream Java syntax'. Huh? He's got a fairly awkward definition of mainstream if that's the case.
Second he rejects anonymous inner classes for GUI event handling, instead recommending making the the containing class implement XXXListener. I'll accept that they're two competing idioms, but his only argument is that his way is more readable. I think there's serious room for disagreement there (especially as the whole point of the anonymous inner class idiom is to keep the event handling code close to the control code.)
Re:Something good may yet come out of this
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
I tried to format it. Really. I just hit 'Submit' instead of 'Preview'.
Re:Something good may yet come out of this
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
Seven times? That sounds a bit high . . .
From the U.S. Dept of Energy:
(In 2001)
Total Per Capita Per $/GDP
(BTUs x 10^15) (BTUs x 10^6) (BTU)
US 97.05 341.8 10,736
Germany 14.35 174.3 5,312
France 10.52 177.8 5,805
Italy 8.11 140.0 6,618
UK 9.81 164.8 7,349
Japan 21.92 172.2 3,879
China 39.67 30.9 35,619
While I agree that eventually everything comes out, the US government when they have a mind to things can stay under wraps for quite some time.
Though by now we know all know the Aurora exists, but over the past 15 operational years, no one has ever seen one. And the National Reconnaissance Office existed for 3 decades while nary a journalist knew they existed.
While the parent was modded as funny, I really believe it's more likely than not that NSA really may be promoting it because they have it cracked.
Slashdot Mirror
Where does helium come from?
Umm, maybe it was a typo.
The major problem Java has is EJBs: everyone in Java-land seems to think that their problem requires solving using this pile of crap. A web application with persistence- ooh we'd better use EJBs then!
That's soooooo 2002!
Swing _is_ rather unresponsive and slow unfortunately, due to it using no native widgets. This is solved by SWT, which mixes platform independence with use of native widgets where they exist. For this reason for example the popular Java IDE Eclipse (written with SWT) is much more responsive than Sun's IDE NetBeans.
But Intellij's IDEA is much more responsive than both NetBeans and Eclipse, and it's written with Swing. So it doesn't seem to me that Swing is necessarily the bottleneck.
The real problem with Swing is that you can get 80% of your functionality and user experience with VB-level effort. The remaining 20% can be so excruciating, that many developers just choose to ignore it.
OK. I reread the original posting. I read linked articles and letters from Nature. Oh, yeah, and I worked at the National Library of Medicine for two years.
Look, what makes this not worth discussing further is an arrogant, condescending tone, the assumption that non-scientists cannot understand something so close to the 'priesthood', and attempts to intentionally cloud, confuse and introduce unneeded complexity to the issue.
I can only hope that this was irony, and I missed it. Can you possibly mean that lower priced journals are an unsolved technical problem?
I understand your point that the 'product' of the journals is not so much paper and ink, as an organized peer review process. But whether they are run as nonprofits or not, academic journals have a near monopolistic ability to extract rents that far exceed their costs.
There's an education sector in the US economy?
I was under the impression that most primary and secondary schools and colleges and universities were run by local and state governments, or at least as nonprofit corporations.
If there's a secret plan to privatize education, Kerry better hope that the NEA doesn't find out.
It actually very difficult short a stock immediately after the IPO.
IIRC there are two issues that drive this.
First, and less important, is the settlement delay. The IPO must have settled before the shares can be loaned to a short seller. It is physically impossible to borrow shares to short during this time. Back in the day, this was three days, but I'm not sure how long it is now.
Second, is the unwillingness of IPO investors to loan their shares to short sellers. In general the buyers of an IPO are not eager to see the price driven down, and thus don't allow the stock to be borrowed and sold. They have this explicit control because in general IPO's are not marginable (generally 30 days must pass). Further, the holders of the IPO know this, and they will do their best to crush you in a short squeeze.
(Rereading your post I see you said 'a couple of weeks'. Oh well. Never mind.)
Somehow you appear to be disagreeing with Kay, yet at the same time your examples reinforce his point.
I dunno. Maybe I'm the dummy.
The copyright, that is, the right to copy a particular work, creates a government sponsored private monopoly on creating and distributing copies of that particular work.
If there is a demand for a copy of the work at a particular price, we can assume that the value of the right to create that copy is no less than the price less the copying costs.
That measurable and concrete dollar (or euro) amount is what has been taken.
Of course this leads to the argument that there is no taking, if there is no demand at the market price. That is, "XXXX loses no money, because I never would have bought the CD at that price anyway."
Needless to say, at a market price equal to the cost of copying demand increases dramatically, just as the profit to the copyright holder drops. But due to the exclusivity of the monopoly, it is the sole discretion of the copyright holder to decide the market price, and thus the level of demand.
the sudan is a far more compelling case for crimes against humanity. but they are basically off the map.
I don't think that's accurate. What's new is the interest the news media has shown of late.
Under Clinton, the US bombed what it believed to be a chemical weapons plant (erroneously, it seems), and used political pressure to force the Sudanese to expel Osama bin Laden. (As "Frontline" put it, in hindsight, this was possibly the worst move since Lenin was put on the special train out of Zurich.)
Under Bush, the US sent John Danforth as a special peace envoy in September 2001. In November 2001, citing human rights abuses, the US unilaterally imposed sanctions on the Sudan, after the UN lifted them in in September 2001.
In terms of humanitarian aid over the past four years the the United States has delivered more aid than all other countries combined.
These policies may not be your cup of tea, but please don't project the news media's attention deficit disorder onto the administration.
All the Microsoft developers are secretly rewriting MS Office in C#.NET.
As soon as the Mono guys finish the hard part of the Linux port, MS will abandon Windows, fork Linux and start selling MS Linux bundled w/ Mono (and of course, Firefox with the new IE theme), and MS Office for Linux.
It's just crazy enough to work.
I checked out the screen shots, and they didn't look any better than my current display.
I've been using IntelliJ IDEA for Java apps for about the past two years, and just recently started doing C#/.NET.
I found VS.Net usable, but pretty unimpressive. The ReSharper Add-in from IntelliJ makes it a little more pleasant, But I think it could come a long way.
In fairness to VS.Net, comparing it to IDEA is rough. IntelliJ IDEA is possibly the best piece of application software I've ever used. (In my limited experience Mathematica is it's only competition, in terms of astonishing, but never surprising behaviour.) In IDE's, Eclipse is pretty good, especially at the price, but feels about one major release behind IDEA.
Since one human year equals seven dog years, couldn't we save time while keeping the team size small by hiring dogs as developers?
The British equivalent would be C.A.R. Hoare's ACM Turing Award acceptance speech The Emperor's Old Clothes.
Why don't you compare stock prices between IBM and M$.
You should actually.
Look at return over the past 5 years. Not just price -- don't forget about IBM's (and more recently MSFT's) dividends. I think you might be surprised.
I don't believe he claims definitive proof. You only have to read a few of the posts in this thread to understand his mindset -- I imagine he was annoyed by C++ chauvinists dismissing Java as orders of magintude worse in performance than C++. It simply isn't.
Over the past year I've been in more than one interview where C++ experts (and these were talented guys) just had no idea about where Java was. It was as if they had written a 'Hello World' applet in 1997 or maybe dabbled with Visual J++ a few years later and wrote the language off permanently as a toy language.
It used to bother me. But now I realize that they're the ones with the problem.
That alone would keep me from reading his book.
First he claims that anonymous inner classes are not 'mainstream Java syntax'. Huh? He's got a fairly awkward definition of mainstream if that's the case.
Second he rejects anonymous inner classes for GUI event handling, instead recommending making the the containing class implement XXXListener. I'll accept that they're two competing idioms, but his only argument is that his way is more readable. I think there's serious room for disagreement there (especially as the whole point of the anonymous inner class idiom is to keep the event handling code close to the control code.)
I tried to format it. Really. I just hit 'Submit' instead of 'Preview'.
Seven times? That sounds a bit high . . .
From the U.S. Dept of Energy: (In 2001) Total Per Capita Per $/GDP (BTUs x 10^15) (BTUs x 10^6) (BTU) US 97.05 341.8 10,736 Germany 14.35 174.3 5,312 France 10.52 177.8 5,805 Italy 8.11 140.0 6,618 UK 9.81 164.8 7,349 Japan 21.92 172.2 3,879 China 39.67 30.9 35,619
Think about this. You believe that corporations engage in morally repugnant behavior and your solution is to emulate them?
Every thief justifies his behavior with a tale of victimhood and entitlement.
While I agree that eventually everything comes out, the US government when they have a mind to things can stay under wraps for quite some time. Though by now we know all know the Aurora exists, but over the past 15 operational years, no one has ever seen one. And the National Reconnaissance Office existed for 3 decades while nary a journalist knew they existed.
While the parent was modded as funny, I really believe it's more likely than not that NSA really may be promoting it because they have it cracked.