You don't work in tech support anywhere with a lot of support calls, obviously.
It is a lot of times better to let them not call you for a while than to call you directly right off the bat for every problem. Users DO solve SOME of their problems on their own via their neighbors which have done it before. Yes their neighbor can tell them how to get around the error like you told the neighbor, but now you've pissed them off and they're going to call you irate, not good.
but how these people have a job not requiring a broom is an eternal mystery.
I work in RTP, NC so we have a high number of geeks in the area, but I don't think I've seen a Janitor here that doesn't know how to use a computer.
I regularly talk to the Janitor ladies at my current job about their computers, and learn things from them occasionally, although I admit naturally thats not the common case.
I realize its not intentional, and the stereotype is probably accurate, but you really might want to consider not being such an ignorant fuck and thinking someone isn't knowledgeable just because they sweep the floors.
I've been doing software development off and on for almost 20 years, and there have been multiple occasions during that time that I've flipped burgers, swept floors, and dumped out other developers trash cans at night.
I know of a multi-millionaire in the town I group up in (20 years ago a million was still considerably impressive), who gave up pretty much everything except his house, started riding the bus around town and working as a janitor at the local hospitals. He didn't want to 'not work' but he also wanted to enjoy life and stop the rat race he'd been in all those years previously.
My point to all this is... your statement is just as prejudice and ignorant as saying (insert racial slur here), you might really want to consider keeping it to yourself, even if you don't realize how wrong it is or how ignorant it makes you look. Remember those people you call stupid are the ones who make it so your nice comfy office is clean and nice to use, treating them poorly or talking down to them because you have the retarded notion that you're better than them. You really need to learn to appreciate the effort they put in and knowledge they have about what they do. You really don't want all the people with brooms' to stand up and decide they've had enough of punks thinking they are better than them.
But the nag-voice relies upon the assumption that the system designers know better than the user what's important
Not exactly. If they knew better, the pilot wouldn't need to fly.
What it really is that the system designers are saying 'hey, we don't really know if you can do anything about it right now, but this looks like MAJOR problem that you should be aware of and you don't currently appear to be, maybe you should check it out before its too late'.
At which point, the pilot responds to the message by fixing the problem, silencing the alarm, or becoming a really expensive yard dart.
Its the engineers and designers saying 'We think what you are doing is a bad idea and could be catastrophic' but leaving the pilot in control as it is entirely possible the pilot is doing what he's doing intentionally and is aware of the situation and its possible outcomes.
Example: When the aircraft landed in the Hudson last year, I promise you Bitch'n Betty was screaming at Captin Sully to pull up, altitude, terrain, as well as probably a stall warning right at the last moments, several caution bells for the failed engines and rapidly failing secondary power systems, probably some obstruction/collision warnings (possibly voice based, don't know in that aircraft) due to flying right at a bunch of structures. All of these things he had to ignore in order to do his job. If the aircraft had been in command he probably would have taken out another sky scrapper or belly floppied into the Hudson when the aircraft fell out of the air as it tried to climb or maintain altitude with 0 thrust.
Fortunately, you can turn the alarms off when you want to, like when you find out the alarm really isn't valid or that dangerous and you have time to take your hands off the stick. The alarms are a perfect example of engineers allowing the pilot to fly the aircraft while maintaining the highest levels of safety by allowing the pilot to adapt to the situation the engineers didn't see coming.
Sadely, the aircraft and engineers on the ground are unusally right and the result if the pilot ignores the warnings is normally not as nice as we'd hope. Sully got had some skill as pilot, nerves from being a airforce driver, and fortunately for everyone onboard, a fair amount of luck.
You're comparing compile errors with runtime errors that users see? Seriously? Users don't compile, and those error messages are equally useless to users anyway.
A windows error reporting dialog with the 'hex dump' is basically a dialog displaying the.core file that it wants to send off to MS. It is infact almost identical data, it contains exception codes, stack traces, memory dumps, register states...
A Linux crash is no different than a Windows crash.
But really, you aren't comparing the same thing. You're thinking that because you see more debugging output from an App on Linux that Windows doesn't have it.
Ever use WinDbg? Think of it as your connenction to stderr for Windows gui apps. Its not, but thats how most Windows developers dump debugging information that users don't ever really need, unlike say... GTK, which is happy to spew information to stderr all day long.
When you get a 'hex dump' its because the bug caused a condition that the developer never expected/tested for and the processor/OS said 'you can't continue'. If the developer expected the error, you'd likely get a popup dialog saying 'couldn't open file' or 'out of memory' as they would have probably handled it if they caught it, maybe still resulting in a crash, but probably resulting in a more useful error message.
There are also FAR more Windows developers than Unix devs. Unix dev is harder to get started, which means you tend weed out no talent copy and pasters before they can get a make file to work. Anyone can write a Windows app in at least 3 different languages with free IDEs from MS alone for.NET. You can get pretty far into 'developing' an application without writing much code. Then the newbs start writing code, poorly, by copy and pasting crap they find on the web until something mostly works.
But they don't realize that the result of one functions error is -1, and that return value is used to determine the number of objects to preallocate, which has just turned into roughly 4.2 billion objects. Then the allocation fails, but they continue to use the object, and a crash follows.
Linux is in no way immune to it, its just less likely to happen since about the only IDE for Unix that comes close to the level of simplicity required for your 'typical' windows programmer is MonoDevelop, and while its simplistic for anyone with a clue, its got just enough odd quirks/bugs and differences from the MS.NET libraries that the copy/paste from someone elses web page method of developing starts to fall apart quickly. (Ask anyone who's ported a non-trival.NET app to mono)
There is a quality of talent different between Linux and Windows. Linux developers are generally more talented and knowledgable, but arrogant assholes who don't give a shit about anything other than making the code work the way they want. Windows developers are generally less talented, lazier, unqualified suckers who got duped into going to college for a CS degree thinking it'd be easy and they'd make a fortune. Now they don't give a shit how they make the money to pay off their few hundred grand in school loans, they just want to pay them off, so if turning out quick/dirty/likely to crash code gets you paid today, you can worry about the bugs and phone calls tomorrow... after you and your family eat.
Neither OS has any particular feature of itself that causes this, the ecosystem of the OS and its contributors (both commercial interests and its community)
Fork() (in C on windows it takes a few more lines of code than just calling fork() but its only a few)
I can't speak for D or Lisp, I don't know really anything about them as far as actually using them.
I'm really sorry you don't realize it but... just because they don't call it a thread or process, doesn't mean its actually something different.
Programming really hasn't changed in years, multiprocessing is becoming the norm, but its in no way what to ever 'new'.
From the following quote I'm going to conclude that you're haven't been programming very long.
You just call "go func()" and a new process is spawned.
The rest of us call this fork(). It may make forking easier for the uninitiated but its not actually any different, and I for one have seen the damage caused by making a language 'easier' to use. VB and Java a great examples of how making programming 'easier' makes the quality of programs developed with that system noticeably lower than 'harder' systems.
If you're going to say there hasn't been anything new since C++ was introduced, ignore all the other potential langauges arbitrarly, then you should also be ignoring a language annouced 4 months ago, that really ISN'T that 'common' since even most of slashdot had to think twice when looking at the title for the article.
Regardless of hype, Go doesn't really mean shit to anyone anywhere yet. Outside of Google, which is investing in the project, you're an idiot or a newbie if you start warping your development models around a language so new.
MS said the same thing about the.NET language family and system. Last I checked, Windows isn't written in C#, its written in C/C++ and ASM, and some apps and services on top are being ported to the.NET framework over time.
You shouldn't believe everything you read on the Internet, and following the latest fad is a pretty bad idea as well.
I know EXACTLY what you're talking about. Until I was forced to write in Java, I felt the EXACT same way.
Then I heard about how much of Google is powered by Java, and then finally I was forced to work with it for my day job.
As someone who prefers C, if you can obtain the performance you want in any higher level language the C/C++, then you can probably do it in Java. I've written an imagine processing library for SVGs that uses Apache Batik to convert my generated SVGs to bitmaps for display. The port of the C code I originally had to Java was actually faster long term than the C code. Mind you, its not real heavy lifting and in reality the C code was doing some retarded things parsing the XML (like reseralizing for no good reason between steps) so I know for a fact the C code would be faster than it was, but considering I can process several thousand of svg files in a second on an old P4, it certainly far exceeds my requirements and took me almost no time to write.
Java really isn't bad, Java Apps do generally suck, and you should still be weary of Java apps. Treat them just like a VB app. Its probably a pile of shit, but there are good programmers working with Java that can make really nice, fast, well behaving applications.
I run into more portability issues with Python than I ever have with Java, and thats just between Windows and Linux, the same could be said for Ruby. I haven't dug deep enough into perl to say the same for it. I avoid TCL ever since I stopped using eggdrop, vile creature that it is.
I've written a little python, a lot of ruby, and a fair amount of java, it beats both those others for cross platform issues in my experience, and I'm ignoring Ruby on DOS as thats a whole new set of issues and isn't really even a fair comparison since the OS is so far different, I don't think there is a DOS JVM, and I have no idea about python and DOS.
I absolutely HATED Java apps before I was forced to start writing Java code myself. What I learned VERY rapidly is that Java apps suck if you're a shitty programmer. If you don't have any clue how to write code and no clue about the common pitfalls of cross platform dev, it can kill you. 9 times out of 10, its because the programmer did stupid shit that he/she shouldn't have that is clearly OS specific when its a cross platform compatibility issue. Likewise all the slow beasts of Java 'apps' that you come across generally suck because the programmers have no idea what they are doing. Stupid crap like doing string concatenation one character at a time using a string variable rather than class designed for string concatenation and proper allocation for it.
Java isn't the problem. Much like VB, shitty Java programmers are the problem. Java and to a much larger extent, VB draw in people who aren't programmers because of the marketing, and then we see tons of crappy Java apps because the language is in fact, TOO easy to use.
Say what you want about Java in the past, it could be true. Today? Muh, there is very little if any truth in your statements at this point in time.
Yep, and when you plug that USB cable into your computer... it detects as a generic USB to serial converter, and you use a standard comm program to talk to it.
You should also point out that no serious network administrator has a web server enabled on his/her routers and switches.
That crap is fine at your home where it doesn't really matter if something gets exploited, but no self respecting router/switch flunky on the planet leaves the web server running longer than it takes to get a console hooked up, login, enable, and turn off the damn webserver.
Then you go setup the device if you don't have a auto-config system setup.
And watching people move in public spaces is a right.
No one is restricting you while you are moving, they are simply watching you and selling the fact that they saw you to anyone with the money to buy the info.
You pay to insure your car. You want to play the game, you take the risks, you protect your car, I'll protect mine... if I want to.
But insurance isn't about protecting your car.
Insurance is the governments solution to not requiring anyone learn to drive. Its how America handles driving tests.
We let anyone drive, even those clearly not cable of doing so, and then stop letting them by making it so they hurt a few people or kill a few people or get in enough other accidents that insurance is so expensive they can't afford it.
If you don't want anyone to hit your car, don't put it on the road.
If you want to be safe while driving, demand real driving tests that require people to actually know how a car works and how to drive.
Insurance has nothing to do with protecting your care and everything to do with the government not being involved and lobbyists for the Insurance companies figuring out a great way to make more money for themselves.
Considering that insurance companies often DO clog up the courts arguing with lawyers over settlement amounts, then I'd say any alternative would be better.
So let me get this straight... you care enough about the law to not scam a drivers license, but not enough to stay off the road so you don't kill anyone... you are one fucked up individual.
esult. I've spent my entire life living in NJ, NY, PA, and CA, and I've been pedestrianized by every single one of them.
FUCKING GOOD you inconsiderate bastard.
If 4 fucking states said you don't need to be driving because its unsafe... YOU DON'T NEED TO DRIVE BECAUSE YOU ARE UNSAFE.
I don't give a shit if you think you have a 'reliable' warning period.
Whine all fucking day long, you don't need to drive, lifes not fair, too fucking bad, good for the states that aren't allowing you to potentially kill someone else when you have a clearly dangerous condition for someone driving to have.
I have a friend who can no longer drive for the same reason. Legally he can drive, but he's not so stupid as to risk other peoples lives when he knows its unsafe.
I managed to hide my condition from the medical community in California for several years. I fibbed to doctors and didn't let them know. If I saw an aura from a rising seizure, I made an immediate exit and found a good place to hide (or I ran outside, into the woods, wherever).
Thank you for giving another prime example of why you shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a drivers seat you inconsiderate son of a bitch.
Now I'm riding a bike six miles to work to get my water, food, shelter etc
You have a 6 mile spread between living, working and food supply... and you can't drive... let me tell you what they did a hundred years ago or so in your situation... THEY MOVED CLOSER TO ONE OF THOSE THINGS. Or in your case, they wouldn't have moved 6 miles away from everything they needed, and you knew it when you moved there since you've already been banned in states. You're obviously not a real quick thinker, another reason you don't need to drive.
Some of us are just fucked.
You aren't fucked. Michael J Fox is fucked. Christopher Reeve was fucked. Stephen Hawking is fucked. You just can't drive, get some fucking perspective and stop being a cry baby. You can still walk. Come back to me when you can't walk, then maybe I'll feel some sympathy.
Yes, this is a rant, inconsiderate self centered people piss me off. The world deals you what you get, its not my problem or anyone elses, it sucks that you can't drive, but its hardly a requirement for life. Do you know how many millions of people in the world live like you do by choice?... go visit Europe, or hell, just move to any of the American city with public transportation, we have a few, not a lot, but enough that I'm sure you could find ONE of them that fits your wants.
before the decay, the decay must have occurred near 3:32 UTC on February 19."
Probably occurred near 3:25, and 3:45 too, and probably yesterday, and the day before and the day before and pretty much the entire time between when the fuel stopped producing thrust and the time it hit the ground.
Even if the theories are wrong, reducing green-house emissions (etc) won't hurt anything but the pocket book.
Wrong. Or more accurately, you have no idea if that statement is accurate. Neither does anyone else. We can't model daily weather patterns, the ludicris idea that we can predict global climate changes anything better than basic historical cycles is just silly.
We really don't KNOW what more CO2 will do. We have theories.
We also don't know what effect adding massive amounts of wind and solar farms will do to the climate, and you're a complete freaking idiot if you think it will have no effect.
EVERYTHING effects EVERYTHING else in the universe, even if very subtly and the system is simply far to complex to accurately model and make statements like your own.
More CO2 could make the equatoral region into massive deserts, but that may also turn higher latitudes into awesome places to live now that more forms of live can live in regions that were formally uninhabitable by most life on Earth. Sure we'll loss some species, but thats what happens.
Thats not likely, don't be me wrong, I don't think thats what would happen, but no one actually knows, anyone who says they do is just ignorant and arrogant. Claiming to be able to predict anything about the climate is about like claiming you understand quantum mechanics.
Random straw man example: the "glaciers aren't melting" comment. First off, most glaciers are in decline [nasa.gov], so they're wrong.
You do realize, they've been in decline for about the last 18k years, right? Since the last glacial period.
No one who knows whats going on denies they are retreating. The argue is that the reason its happening and what it will mean for is. The argument revolves around one group of people who think humans are far more impacting on the planet than science suggests, and how the other group doesn't really think our species has much to do with it or much control over it, mostly due to the evidence that... this happened thousands of times before humans even existed.
The ice age was ending long before we started speaking. The 'glaciers have melted' thousands of times.
The climate is changing, no one anywhere is arguing that. Everyone talks about how the Earth has changing and getting warmer, but everyone who does that conveniently ignores the fact that the planet has done this before, and has gotten far hotter, and its doing EXACTLY WHAT IT SHOULD BE DURING THIS PART OF THE CYCLE according to data we have.
It's really a shame that Gore picked that case
No, its really fortunate that he did. It makes it easier for some people to realize that he's nothing more than a politician doing whatever he can to get attention and actually doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about. Its that kind of crap that makes people think global warming is a bunch of bullshit. Its hard to argue for something when it seems like every week more peer review shows that the existing statements about whats 'going to happen' and whats 'happening' are just bullshit exaggeration. Makes it really hard to be taken seriously when you keep getting shown up as a liar or being nice, a horrible inaccurate excuse for a scientist. Sure ignorant people like yourself who haven't actually looked at the data will continue to treat it like a religion, but no one can stop nutjobs who blindly believe what someone says without thinking for themselves.
I know global warming exists. I've seen the studies and the histories. I've done some research on my own into these studies. The only conclusion you can come to is 'this isn't something new, its happened thousands and thousands of times before and will happen thousands and thousands of times again. Other than that, you really can't make predictions. We can't even accurately model daily weather, and you want to argue that we understand and can modify long term global climates? If we can't predict day to day weather patterns reliably, WTF makes you think we can predict the outcome of those patterns repeating with theoretical outside input that we've never modeled before? Stop treating science like a religion and treat it logically, that is after all what science is.
Yet you seem to think that a very short (geologically) period of study about the Earths climate is accurate, without any real knowledge of whats going on. All we can do is make educated guesses based on historical evidence that we don't actually really know is even right.
The whole thing is relatively new science using layers apon layers of theoretical data that is derived from other theoretical data that NO ONE ANYWHERE CAN ACTUALLY VERIFY since no one was keeping records for the last... oh... 2 or 3 million years.
You're problem is that you think you and your 'group' is so smart that they know whats going on and no one else could possibly have a valid thought, your group keeps using the same battle cry that the world is going to end, yet DAY AFTER DAY the evidence your group is using gets shown to be at best inaccurate, in many cases its just fucking wrong, and the more studying and investigation that goes into global warming, the more it comes out that those screaming about it are lying to get people to believe them.
Pot, Kettle, Black.
Stop thinking your group is so fucking smart when you start getting your way (more research and concern) and everyone else starts realizing you've been crying wolf and talking about shit you don't actually understand or can't even get the fucking math right on.
Then come back and have a discussion without arrogance and ignorance, THEN... and ONLY THEN, may be we can actually determine how much of a problem it is, IF we even have anything to do with it as a species and most importantly, if theres a damn thing we can do to stop it... heres a hint, until we can adjust the Earths orbit to be stable, not cyclic, as well as the Suns power output, and millions of other things that have far more impact on our climate than CO2 output from fossil fuels.
Its easy to call other people dumb when you're entirely ignorant of the topic of conversation.
The Internet today is pretty much identical in everyway to the Internet I used before anyone knew who Al Gore was.
The difference today is more spam and more shitty businesses that I'd really rather not exist.
Please enlighten me as to what Mr Gore actually did other than using a group of networks that were already about to explode into the public as a political battle cry.
If you think Al Gore did anything special for the Internet, you weren't doing much on the Internet back then.
Not taking BSD into account? Heh, Most BSD users love Apple since for the most part as a user OSX is a really pretty BSD. They took BSD into account when they made OSX, they just brought the BSD people into their camp so they don't have to fight against them, we BSDers fight with them!
WTF are you talking about? It didn't die, now its just done on CDs and DVDs instead of floppies. Its still almost the exact same methods. Copy protection today with SecureROM and the like is conceptually identical to the old bad sector tricks... you know... because... they are still bad sector tricks... still screwing with the ECC.
It will be cracked as quickly as possible. Why? IF its hard, its a target and the crackers will want to be the first to break it, that IS the game for many crackers.
If it is weak, it'll be cracked by someone else, but cracked all the same.
Its all just a matter of time, crackers are basically sitting there, daring you to throw something at them and tell them it can't be broken. History has shown that there is no such thing as an unbreakable system, the questions are simply how and how long it takes.
Its a safe bet that emulating a WoW server is harder than a save game server for whatever crap Ubisoft is spewing this week.
Do you know how samba came into existence? Reverse engineering the network packets to figure out what the server was doing.
Nothing they can do will last long term, its just a question of how long it lasts and if anyone cares enough to defeat it.
If what they are doing really is an issue that creates problems for users it won't last long. All of the 'rants' about DRM now are limited to a small percentage of customers, most of them techies who know whats going on and are just bitchy about it or do something that causes the DRM to get angry and cut them off (be it local, Steam or whatever).
Its really just not as big of an issue as slashdotters would like to think it is.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't work in tech support anywhere with a lot of support calls, obviously.
It is a lot of times better to let them not call you for a while than to call you directly right off the bat for every problem. Users DO solve SOME of their problems on their own via their neighbors which have done it before. Yes their neighbor can tell them how to get around the error like you told the neighbor, but now you've pissed them off and they're going to call you irate, not good.
I work in RTP, NC so we have a high number of geeks in the area, but I don't think I've seen a Janitor here that doesn't know how to use a computer.
I regularly talk to the Janitor ladies at my current job about their computers, and learn things from them occasionally, although I admit naturally thats not the common case.
I realize its not intentional, and the stereotype is probably accurate, but you really might want to consider not being such an ignorant fuck and thinking someone isn't knowledgeable just because they sweep the floors.
I've been doing software development off and on for almost 20 years, and there have been multiple occasions during that time that I've flipped burgers, swept floors, and dumped out other developers trash cans at night.
I know of a multi-millionaire in the town I group up in (20 years ago a million was still considerably impressive), who gave up pretty much everything except his house, started riding the bus around town and working as a janitor at the local hospitals. He didn't want to 'not work' but he also wanted to enjoy life and stop the rat race he'd been in all those years previously.
My point to all this is ... your statement is just as prejudice and ignorant as saying (insert racial slur here), you might really want to consider keeping it to yourself, even if you don't realize how wrong it is or how ignorant it makes you look. Remember those people you call stupid are the ones who make it so your nice comfy office is clean and nice to use, treating them poorly or talking down to them because you have the retarded notion that you're better than them. You really need to learn to appreciate the effort they put in and knowledge they have about what they do. You really don't want all the people with brooms' to stand up and decide they've had enough of punks thinking they are better than them.
Not exactly. If they knew better, the pilot wouldn't need to fly.
What it really is that the system designers are saying 'hey, we don't really know if you can do anything about it right now, but this looks like MAJOR problem that you should be aware of and you don't currently appear to be, maybe you should check it out before its too late'.
At which point, the pilot responds to the message by fixing the problem, silencing the alarm, or becoming a really expensive yard dart.
Its the engineers and designers saying 'We think what you are doing is a bad idea and could be catastrophic' but leaving the pilot in control as it is entirely possible the pilot is doing what he's doing intentionally and is aware of the situation and its possible outcomes.
Example: When the aircraft landed in the Hudson last year, I promise you Bitch'n Betty was screaming at Captin Sully to pull up, altitude, terrain, as well as probably a stall warning right at the last moments, several caution bells for the failed engines and rapidly failing secondary power systems, probably some obstruction/collision warnings (possibly voice based, don't know in that aircraft) due to flying right at a bunch of structures. All of these things he had to ignore in order to do his job. If the aircraft had been in command he probably would have taken out another sky scrapper or belly floppied into the Hudson when the aircraft fell out of the air as it tried to climb or maintain altitude with 0 thrust.
Fortunately, you can turn the alarms off when you want to, like when you find out the alarm really isn't valid or that dangerous and you have time to take your hands off the stick. The alarms are a perfect example of engineers allowing the pilot to fly the aircraft while maintaining the highest levels of safety by allowing the pilot to adapt to the situation the engineers didn't see coming.
Sadely, the aircraft and engineers on the ground are unusally right and the result if the pilot ignores the warnings is normally not as nice as we'd hope. Sully got had some skill as pilot, nerves from being a airforce driver, and fortunately for everyone onboard, a fair amount of luck.
You're comparing compile errors with runtime errors that users see? Seriously? Users don't compile, and those error messages are equally useless to users anyway.
A windows error reporting dialog with the 'hex dump' is basically a dialog displaying the .core file that it wants to send off to MS. It is infact almost identical data, it contains exception codes, stack traces, memory dumps, register states ...
A Linux crash is no different than a Windows crash.
But really, you aren't comparing the same thing. You're thinking that because you see more debugging output from an App on Linux that Windows doesn't have it.
Ever use WinDbg? Think of it as your connenction to stderr for Windows gui apps. Its not, but thats how most Windows developers dump debugging information that users don't ever really need, unlike say ... GTK, which is happy to spew information to stderr all day long.
When you get a 'hex dump' its because the bug caused a condition that the developer never expected/tested for and the processor/OS said 'you can't continue'. If the developer expected the error, you'd likely get a popup dialog saying 'couldn't open file' or 'out of memory' as they would have probably handled it if they caught it, maybe still resulting in a crash, but probably resulting in a more useful error message.
There are also FAR more Windows developers than Unix devs. Unix dev is harder to get started, which means you tend weed out no talent copy and pasters before they can get a make file to work. Anyone can write a Windows app in at least 3 different languages with free IDEs from MS alone for .NET. You can get pretty far into 'developing' an application without writing much code. Then the newbs start writing code, poorly, by copy and pasting crap they find on the web until something mostly works.
But they don't realize that the result of one functions error is -1, and that return value is used to determine the number of objects to preallocate, which has just turned into roughly 4.2 billion objects. Then the allocation fails, but they continue to use the object, and a crash follows.
Linux is in no way immune to it, its just less likely to happen since about the only IDE for Unix that comes close to the level of simplicity required for your 'typical' windows programmer is MonoDevelop, and while its simplistic for anyone with a clue, its got just enough odd quirks/bugs and differences from the MS .NET libraries that the copy/paste from someone elses web page method of developing starts to fall apart quickly. (Ask anyone who's ported a non-trival .NET app to mono)
There is a quality of talent different between Linux and Windows. Linux developers are generally more talented and knowledgable, but arrogant assholes who don't give a shit about anything other than making the code work the way they want. Windows developers are generally less talented, lazier, unqualified suckers who got duped into going to college for a CS degree thinking it'd be easy and they'd make a fortune. Now they don't give a shit how they make the money to pay off their few hundred grand in school loans, they just want to pay them off, so if turning out quick/dirty/likely to crash code gets you paid today, you can worry about the bugs and phone calls tomorrow ... after you and your family eat.
Neither OS has any particular feature of itself that causes this, the ecosystem of the OS and its contributors (both commercial interests and its community)
Fork() (in C on windows it takes a few more lines of code than just calling fork() but its only a few)
I can't speak for D or Lisp, I don't know really anything about them as far as actually using them.
I'm really sorry you don't realize it but ... just because they don't call it a thread or process, doesn't mean its actually something different.
Programming really hasn't changed in years, multiprocessing is becoming the norm, but its in no way what to ever 'new'.
From the following quote I'm going to conclude that you're haven't been programming very long.
The rest of us call this fork(). It may make forking easier for the uninitiated but its not actually any different, and I for one have seen the damage caused by making a language 'easier' to use. VB and Java a great examples of how making programming 'easier' makes the quality of programs developed with that system noticeably lower than 'harder' systems.
Yes
If you're going to say there hasn't been anything new since C++ was introduced, ignore all the other potential langauges arbitrarly, then you should also be ignoring a language annouced 4 months ago, that really ISN'T that 'common' since even most of slashdot had to think twice when looking at the title for the article.
Regardless of hype, Go doesn't really mean shit to anyone anywhere yet. Outside of Google, which is investing in the project, you're an idiot or a newbie if you start warping your development models around a language so new.
MS said the same thing about the .NET language family and system. Last I checked, Windows isn't written in C#, its written in C/C++ and ASM, and some apps and services on top are being ported to the .NET framework over time.
You shouldn't believe everything you read on the Internet, and following the latest fad is a pretty bad idea as well.
Because most Java programmers suck.
I know EXACTLY what you're talking about. Until I was forced to write in Java, I felt the EXACT same way.
Then I heard about how much of Google is powered by Java, and then finally I was forced to work with it for my day job.
As someone who prefers C, if you can obtain the performance you want in any higher level language the C/C++, then you can probably do it in Java. I've written an imagine processing library for SVGs that uses Apache Batik to convert my generated SVGs to bitmaps for display. The port of the C code I originally had to Java was actually faster long term than the C code. Mind you, its not real heavy lifting and in reality the C code was doing some retarded things parsing the XML (like reseralizing for no good reason between steps) so I know for a fact the C code would be faster than it was, but considering I can process several thousand of svg files in a second on an old P4, it certainly far exceeds my requirements and took me almost no time to write.
Java really isn't bad, Java Apps do generally suck, and you should still be weary of Java apps. Treat them just like a VB app. Its probably a pile of shit, but there are good programmers working with Java that can make really nice, fast, well behaving applications.
I run into more portability issues with Python than I ever have with Java, and thats just between Windows and Linux, the same could be said for Ruby. I haven't dug deep enough into perl to say the same for it. I avoid TCL ever since I stopped using eggdrop, vile creature that it is.
I've written a little python, a lot of ruby, and a fair amount of java, it beats both those others for cross platform issues in my experience, and I'm ignoring Ruby on DOS as thats a whole new set of issues and isn't really even a fair comparison since the OS is so far different, I don't think there is a DOS JVM, and I have no idea about python and DOS.
I absolutely HATED Java apps before I was forced to start writing Java code myself. What I learned VERY rapidly is that Java apps suck if you're a shitty programmer. If you don't have any clue how to write code and no clue about the common pitfalls of cross platform dev, it can kill you. 9 times out of 10, its because the programmer did stupid shit that he/she shouldn't have that is clearly OS specific when its a cross platform compatibility issue. Likewise all the slow beasts of Java 'apps' that you come across generally suck because the programmers have no idea what they are doing. Stupid crap like doing string concatenation one character at a time using a string variable rather than class designed for string concatenation and proper allocation for it.
Java isn't the problem. Much like VB, shitty Java programmers are the problem. Java and to a much larger extent, VB draw in people who aren't programmers because of the marketing, and then we see tons of crappy Java apps because the language is in fact, TOO easy to use.
Say what you want about Java in the past, it could be true. Today? Muh, there is very little if any truth in your statements at this point in time.
Yep, and when you plug that USB cable into your computer ... it detects as a generic USB to serial converter, and you use a standard comm program to talk to it.
You should also point out that no serious network administrator has a web server enabled on his/her routers and switches.
That crap is fine at your home where it doesn't really matter if something gets exploited, but no self respecting router/switch flunky on the planet leaves the web server running longer than it takes to get a console hooked up, login, enable, and turn off the damn webserver.
Then you go setup the device if you don't have a auto-config system setup.
And watching people move in public spaces is a right.
No one is restricting you while you are moving, they are simply watching you and selling the fact that they saw you to anyone with the money to buy the info.
You need to learn what a right is.
No
You pay to insure your car. You want to play the game, you take the risks, you protect your car, I'll protect mine ... if I want to.
But insurance isn't about protecting your car.
Insurance is the governments solution to not requiring anyone learn to drive. Its how America handles driving tests.
We let anyone drive, even those clearly not cable of doing so, and then stop letting them by making it so they hurt a few people or kill a few people or get in enough other accidents that insurance is so expensive they can't afford it.
If you don't want anyone to hit your car, don't put it on the road.
If you want to be safe while driving, demand real driving tests that require people to actually know how a car works and how to drive.
Insurance has nothing to do with protecting your care and everything to do with the government not being involved and lobbyists for the Insurance companies figuring out a great way to make more money for themselves.
Considering that insurance companies often DO clog up the courts arguing with lawyers over settlement amounts, then I'd say any alternative would be better.
So let me get this straight ... you care enough about the law to not scam a drivers license, but not enough to stay off the road so you don't kill anyone ... you are one fucked up individual.
FUCKING GOOD you inconsiderate bastard.
If 4 fucking states said you don't need to be driving because its unsafe ... YOU DON'T NEED TO DRIVE BECAUSE YOU ARE UNSAFE.
I don't give a shit if you think you have a 'reliable' warning period.
Whine all fucking day long, you don't need to drive, lifes not fair, too fucking bad, good for the states that aren't allowing you to potentially kill someone else when you have a clearly dangerous condition for someone driving to have.
I have a friend who can no longer drive for the same reason. Legally he can drive, but he's not so stupid as to risk other peoples lives when he knows its unsafe.
Thank you for giving another prime example of why you shouldn't be allowed anywhere near a drivers seat you inconsiderate son of a bitch.
You have a 6 mile spread between living, working and food supply ... and you can't drive ... let me tell you what they did a hundred years ago or so in your situation ... THEY MOVED CLOSER TO ONE OF THOSE THINGS. Or in your case, they wouldn't have moved 6 miles away from everything they needed, and you knew it when you moved there since you've already been banned in states. You're obviously not a real quick thinker, another reason you don't need to drive.
You aren't fucked. Michael J Fox is fucked. Christopher Reeve was fucked. Stephen Hawking is fucked. You just can't drive, get some fucking perspective and stop being a cry baby. You can still walk. Come back to me when you can't walk, then maybe I'll feel some sympathy.
Yes, this is a rant, inconsiderate self centered people piss me off. The world deals you what you get, its not my problem or anyone elses, it sucks that you can't drive, but its hardly a requirement for life. Do you know how many millions of people in the world live like you do by choice? ... go visit Europe, or hell, just move to any of the American city with public transportation, we have a few, not a lot, but enough that I'm sure you could find ONE of them that fits your wants.
It sounds like a perfect time to start destroying video cameras we find in public, regardless of who owns them or what they are for.
Not at a precise moment in time.
Probably occurred near 3:25, and 3:45 too, and probably yesterday, and the day before and the day before and pretty much the entire time between when the fuel stopped producing thrust and the time it hit the ground.
Wrong. Or more accurately, you have no idea if that statement is accurate. Neither does anyone else. We can't model daily weather patterns, the ludicris idea that we can predict global climate changes anything better than basic historical cycles is just silly.
We really don't KNOW what more CO2 will do. We have theories.
We also don't know what effect adding massive amounts of wind and solar farms will do to the climate, and you're a complete freaking idiot if you think it will have no effect.
EVERYTHING effects EVERYTHING else in the universe, even if very subtly and the system is simply far to complex to accurately model and make statements like your own.
More CO2 could make the equatoral region into massive deserts, but that may also turn higher latitudes into awesome places to live now that more forms of live can live in regions that were formally uninhabitable by most life on Earth. Sure we'll loss some species, but thats what happens.
Thats not likely, don't be me wrong, I don't think thats what would happen, but no one actually knows, anyone who says they do is just ignorant and arrogant. Claiming to be able to predict anything about the climate is about like claiming you understand quantum mechanics.
You do realize, they've been in decline for about the last 18k years, right? Since the last glacial period.
No one who knows whats going on denies they are retreating. The argue is that the reason its happening and what it will mean for is. The argument revolves around one group of people who think humans are far more impacting on the planet than science suggests, and how the other group doesn't really think our species has much to do with it or much control over it, mostly due to the evidence that ... this happened thousands of times before humans even existed.
The ice age was ending long before we started speaking. The 'glaciers have melted' thousands of times.
The climate is changing, no one anywhere is arguing that. Everyone talks about how the Earth has changing and getting warmer, but everyone who does that conveniently ignores the fact that the planet has done this before, and has gotten far hotter, and its doing EXACTLY WHAT IT SHOULD BE DURING THIS PART OF THE CYCLE according to data we have.
No, its really fortunate that he did. It makes it easier for some people to realize that he's nothing more than a politician doing whatever he can to get attention and actually doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about. Its that kind of crap that makes people think global warming is a bunch of bullshit. Its hard to argue for something when it seems like every week more peer review shows that the existing statements about whats 'going to happen' and whats 'happening' are just bullshit exaggeration. Makes it really hard to be taken seriously when you keep getting shown up as a liar or being nice, a horrible inaccurate excuse for a scientist. Sure ignorant people like yourself who haven't actually looked at the data will continue to treat it like a religion, but no one can stop nutjobs who blindly believe what someone says without thinking for themselves.
I know global warming exists. I've seen the studies and the histories. I've done some research on my own into these studies. The only conclusion you can come to is 'this isn't something new, its happened thousands and thousands of times before and will happen thousands and thousands of times again. Other than that, you really can't make predictions. We can't even accurately model daily weather, and you want to argue that we understand and can modify long term global climates? If we can't predict day to day weather patterns reliably, WTF makes you think we can predict the outcome of those patterns repeating with theoretical outside input that we've never modeled before? Stop treating science like a religion and treat it logically, that is after all what science is.
Yet you seem to think that a very short (geologically) period of study about the Earths climate is accurate, without any real knowledge of whats going on. All we can do is make educated guesses based on historical evidence that we don't actually really know is even right.
The whole thing is relatively new science using layers apon layers of theoretical data that is derived from other theoretical data that NO ONE ANYWHERE CAN ACTUALLY VERIFY since no one was keeping records for the last ... oh ... 2 or 3 million years.
You're problem is that you think you and your 'group' is so smart that they know whats going on and no one else could possibly have a valid thought, your group keeps using the same battle cry that the world is going to end, yet DAY AFTER DAY the evidence your group is using gets shown to be at best inaccurate, in many cases its just fucking wrong, and the more studying and investigation that goes into global warming, the more it comes out that those screaming about it are lying to get people to believe them.
Pot, Kettle, Black.
Stop thinking your group is so fucking smart when you start getting your way (more research and concern) and everyone else starts realizing you've been crying wolf and talking about shit you don't actually understand or can't even get the fucking math right on.
Then come back and have a discussion without arrogance and ignorance, THEN ... and ONLY THEN, may be we can actually determine how much of a problem it is, IF we even have anything to do with it as a species and most importantly, if theres a damn thing we can do to stop it ... heres a hint, until we can adjust the Earths orbit to be stable, not cyclic, as well as the Suns power output, and millions of other things that have far more impact on our climate than CO2 output from fossil fuels.
Its easy to call other people dumb when you're entirely ignorant of the topic of conversation.
You need a dictionary.
And ...
The Internet today is pretty much identical in everyway to the Internet I used before anyone knew who Al Gore was.
The difference today is more spam and more shitty businesses that I'd really rather not exist.
Please enlighten me as to what Mr Gore actually did other than using a group of networks that were already about to explode into the public as a political battle cry.
If you think Al Gore did anything special for the Internet, you weren't doing much on the Internet back then.
Not taking BSD into account? Heh, Most BSD users love Apple since for the most part as a user OSX is a really pretty BSD. They took BSD into account when they made OSX, they just brought the BSD people into their camp so they don't have to fight against them, we BSDers fight with them!
WTF are you talking about? It didn't die, now its just done on CDs and DVDs instead of floppies. Its still almost the exact same methods. Copy protection today with SecureROM and the like is conceptually identical to the old bad sector tricks ... you know ... because ... they are still bad sector tricks ... still screwing with the ECC.
It will be cracked as quickly as possible. Why? IF its hard, its a target and the crackers will want to be the first to break it, that IS the game for many crackers.
If it is weak, it'll be cracked by someone else, but cracked all the same.
Its all just a matter of time, crackers are basically sitting there, daring you to throw something at them and tell them it can't be broken. History has shown that there is no such thing as an unbreakable system, the questions are simply how and how long it takes.
Its a safe bet that emulating a WoW server is harder than a save game server for whatever crap Ubisoft is spewing this week.
Do you know how samba came into existence? Reverse engineering the network packets to figure out what the server was doing.
Nothing they can do will last long term, its just a question of how long it lasts and if anyone cares enough to defeat it.
If what they are doing really is an issue that creates problems for users it won't last long. All of the 'rants' about DRM now are limited to a small percentage of customers, most of them techies who know whats going on and are just bitchy about it or do something that causes the DRM to get angry and cut them off (be it local, Steam or whatever).
Its really just not as big of an issue as slashdotters would like to think it is.