Also, PayPal doesn't have the best reputation. I use it, but if PayPal was the only option I'd restrict my eBay acivity to the bare minimum (read: items I can't find anywhere else).
You put in money at the one end, you get raw Science out the other. You can the use the Science to create new techologies or make the world a better place.
Parallel to Clarke's Law: Any sufficiently advanced application of the scientific method will be confused with magic.
Do not question the wisdom of choosing the web as the ultimate application framework! The browser is much better at running applications than, say, Java or the operating system. Now we just need to replace that HTTP connectivity with raw sockets (the browsers get a backwards compatibility mode for old-fashioned HTTP websites) to turn our web browsers into the greatest thing ever!
If it's an application it can be made better by implementing it in XML and JavaScript. If you don't believe this you're old and obsolete and shouldn't use computers anymore.
Let's see... We have one arsenic atom per bit. Let's assume a one (decimal) megabit quantum storage unit. That means one million arsenic atoms.
Arsenic has a nuclear mass of about 74.92159 u with one u being about 1.660538782 * 10^(27) kg.
Google tells us that 74921590 u = 1.24410212 * 10^(-10) micrograms (0.000000000124410212 ug). Note that you already eat several ug of arsenic a day, so eating your megabit quantum storage chip is unlikely to give you arsenic poisoning. That is not what you should worry about at that moment.
The real question is: Now that we can create flat atoms, can we also create sharp atoms? And can we use them to create chords? This is some serious stuff; maybe this is the first time in history we can create detectable amounts of the theoretical F sharp minor matter.
Well Flash works perfectly well without a browser, SVG is an image format that also happens to work on its own and XUL is an application framework. JavaScript is only recently being used to do something more than simply add to what hypertext does.
XULRunner would be an example of what I see as a more useful approach to a JavaScript-based application framework. Firefox could be an instance of an application running on top of it, doing one specialized thing: Display hypertext. You click a link to a rich web application; Firefox downloads it and hands it over to XULRunner, which then executes the application as a separate process. Yes, I'm essentially thinking Java Web Start.
Maybe the "a device/application should do one thing well" mindset is dying out... I also think that a mobile phone should be optimized for making and taking phone calls and nothing else; apparently an equally antiquated view. However, given how current browsers behave, I'd prefer to have a working hypertext viewer instead of something that tries to be everything for everyone but when it chokes on a website with funky JS hacks it takes half your desktop with it.
I use GMail via POP3/SMTP. In my opinion webmail interfaces are cumbersome and inferior to specialized client and having the mail locally is very useful. But then again I also don't believe in sharing my data with random strangers, so I'm probably not Web 2.0 enough to understand how a hypertext rendering program is the best possible application framework.
I think of browser-based JavaScript mostly in terms of handling HTML and the associated stuff. I don't really believe in rich web applications; not inside the browser. I undertand that raw sockets are a great thing to have. I just don't think browsers are the best environment to use them.
Actualy, XmlHttpRequest is pretty straightforward. It sends an HTTP request. Tht request can either be blocking or non-blocking. When you get the reply you can use the data in whichever way you want. AJAX etc. is just icing on that. The basic technology is "make an HTTP request from JavaScript"; not exactly bloated.
I suspect that JavaScript uses that instead of sockets because in most cases you really just want to use HTTP; no need for low-level socket programming. Of course there are probably some people who really want to send UDP datagrams from their browser's JavaScript runtime, but for most web development, that capability is overkill.
Of course, in practice a lot of this would be done in parallell, but it would still be nice, especially since a lot of times browsers will wait until binary objects are completely loaded before continuing to render the rest of the page.
Not just binary ones. Sometimes a page uses external JavaScript from a site that takes ages to respond, keeping the rest of the page from loading. Google Analytics, I'm looking at you.
At home disruptive sites like Google Analytics are blocked at the DNS level but that doesn't quite work when I'm outside my home network. I could use NoScript but I found that often websites I want to use JavaScript also have these kinds of annoyances.
As for PHP: I like that it allows me to quickly throw something together. The language lends itself very well to quick and (more or less) dirty scripts that would be more complicated to to implement in a stricter language. I often use it as a shell scripting language when I need to get something done right now with no regards to the solution being pretty.
Regarding types in PHP... I'd prefer PHP to support explicit types but use type inference by default. That way it would retain its ease of use but also allow for more robust scripts. But that's all a moot point; the PHP devs are about as enthusiastic about cleaning up their language as Microsoft is about open-sourcing NTFS.
Your rockets are both strong and big, while Chinese rockets are big in nothing important in good elephant. Of course, if NASA screws up the calculations the front of the rocket will be a lemon avenue flying straightly but as they say, worry to lose is to lead to the evil augury, so you shouldn't worry about that too much. Just don't let the land kill the project to let it going to bed.
Anyhow, rock on NASA. The wish power are together with you.
And no decent graphics chipset, not even a GMA950! Given the fact that AMD is now actively contributing to the OSS Radeon drivers, there's no excuse for not building an HD4850 into the router.
Yes, but in Germany (where we have religion class) they'd be told that even without specifically mentioning God, ID is too close to religion to be taught in a science class. This kind of stuff is what religion and philosophy classes are for; it's not scientific and better suited for other classes, hence it doesn't go in the science curriculum. End of debate.
My point is that the lack of a class that is supposed to be about this kind of stuff makes it easier for fundamentalists to inject it into classes that aren't.
Yeah, but Blizzard first put up the splash screen and then apparently forgot to upload the rest of the site for an hour or so. You got the splash screen followed by a 404.
We have concluded that when we split or fuse atoms, they go bang (ask the Japanese, they will vouch for it).
We have shown that rapidly compressing a sufficiently large piece of enriched uranium results in a big explosion. Hiroshima and Nagasaki don't prove that atoms were actually split.
With a bit of legwork I'm sure I could come up with an argumentation that convinced certain politicians that atomic theory is really just a theory and shouldn't be taught as truth in school.
It would be most correct to put it into a religion class. Yes, there should be a religion class in school; religion is too important to be ignorant about it. No, Sunday school isn't useful; that only teaches you stuff about your own religion. Religion class would teach you about other religions and about philosophical questions in the context of one's own religion (eg. creation vs. evolution vs. Intelligent Design).
If you guys had that I'd assume that the religious types would spend less time trying to invade all other classes.
Slashdot Mirror
Also, PayPal doesn't have the best reputation. I use it, but if PayPal was the only option I'd restrict my eBay acivity to the bare minimum (read: items I can't find anywhere else).
You put in money at the one end, you get raw Science out the other. You can the use the Science to create new techologies or make the world a better place.
Parallel to Clarke's Law: Any sufficiently advanced application of the scientific method will be confused with magic.
Do not question the wisdom of choosing the web as the ultimate application framework! The browser is much better at running applications than, say, Java or the operating system. Now we just need to replace that HTTP connectivity with raw sockets (the browsers get a backwards compatibility mode for old-fashioned HTTP websites) to turn our web browsers into the greatest thing ever!
If it's an application it can be made better by implementing it in XML and JavaScript. If you don't believe this you're old and obsolete and shouldn't use computers anymore.
Let's see... We have one arsenic atom per bit. Let's assume a one (decimal) megabit quantum storage unit. That means one million arsenic atoms.
Arsenic has a nuclear mass of about 74.92159 u with one u being about 1.660538782 * 10^(27) kg.
Google tells us that 74921590 u = 1.24410212 * 10^(-10) micrograms (0.000000000124410212 ug). Note that you already eat several ug of arsenic a day, so eating your megabit quantum storage chip is unlikely to give you arsenic poisoning. That is not what you should worry about at that moment.
Great. Surveillance at the electron level. Big Brother has his eyes everywhere...
The real question is: Now that we can create flat atoms, can we also create sharp atoms? And can we use them to create chords? This is some serious stuff; maybe this is the first time in history we can create detectable amounts of the theoretical F sharp minor matter.
They did, HURD. We all know how that played out.
Well Flash works perfectly well without a browser, SVG is an image format that also happens to work on its own and XUL is an application framework. JavaScript is only recently being used to do something more than simply add to what hypertext does.
XULRunner would be an example of what I see as a more useful approach to a JavaScript-based application framework. Firefox could be an instance of an application running on top of it, doing one specialized thing: Display hypertext. You click a link to a rich web application; Firefox downloads it and hands it over to XULRunner, which then executes the application as a separate process. Yes, I'm essentially thinking Java Web Start.
Maybe the "a device/application should do one thing well" mindset is dying out... I also think that a mobile phone should be optimized for making and taking phone calls and nothing else; apparently an equally antiquated view. However, given how current browsers behave, I'd prefer to have a working hypertext viewer instead of something that tries to be everything for everyone but when it chokes on a website with funky JS hacks it takes half your desktop with it.
...of how incredibly fast the anti-DRM hackers are. They defeated this devious increment-a-value-by-one scheme within hours!
I use GMail via POP3/SMTP. In my opinion webmail interfaces are cumbersome and inferior to specialized client and having the mail locally is very useful. But then again I also don't believe in sharing my data with random strangers, so I'm probably not Web 2.0 enough to understand how a hypertext rendering program is the best possible application framework.
I think of browser-based JavaScript mostly in terms of handling HTML and the associated stuff. I don't really believe in rich web applications; not inside the browser. I undertand that raw sockets are a great thing to have. I just don't think browsers are the best environment to use them.
A soccer match with a ball made from solid silicon? Now that's something I'd pay to watch.
Actualy, XmlHttpRequest is pretty straightforward. It sends an HTTP request. Tht request can either be blocking or non-blocking. When you get the reply you can use the data in whichever way you want. AJAX etc. is just icing on that. The basic technology is "make an HTTP request from JavaScript"; not exactly bloated.
I suspect that JavaScript uses that instead of sockets because in most cases you really just want to use HTTP; no need for low-level socket programming. Of course there are probably some people who really want to send UDP datagrams from their browser's JavaScript runtime, but for most web development, that capability is overkill.
Not just binary ones. Sometimes a page uses external JavaScript from a site that takes ages to respond, keeping the rest of the page from loading. Google Analytics, I'm looking at you.
At home disruptive sites like Google Analytics are blocked at the DNS level but that doesn't quite work when I'm outside my home network. I could use NoScript but I found that often websites I want to use JavaScript also have these kinds of annoyances.
And not just IP! When I'm done stealing IP I'll steal BGP and ICMP!
The internet will be mine, mine! Mwa ha ha ha ha ha ha!
As for PHP: I like that it allows me to quickly throw something together. The language lends itself very well to quick and (more or less) dirty scripts that would be more complicated to to implement in a stricter language. I often use it as a shell scripting language when I need to get something done right now with no regards to the solution being pretty. Regarding types in PHP... I'd prefer PHP to support explicit types but use type inference by default. That way it would retain its ease of use but also allow for more robust scripts. But that's all a moot point; the PHP devs are about as enthusiastic about cleaning up their language as Microsoft is about open-sourcing NTFS.
Your rockets are both strong and big, while Chinese rockets are big in nothing important in good elephant. Of course, if NASA screws up the calculations the front of the rocket will be a lemon avenue flying straightly but as they say, worry to lose is to lead to the evil augury, so you shouldn't worry about that too much. Just don't let the land kill the project to let it going to bed.
Anyhow, rock on NASA. The wish power are together with you.
And no decent graphics chipset, not even a GMA950! Given the fact that AMD is now actively contributing to the OSS Radeon drivers, there's no excuse for not building an HD4850 into the router.
Yes, but in Germany (where we have religion class) they'd be told that even without specifically mentioning God, ID is too close to religion to be taught in a science class. This kind of stuff is what religion and philosophy classes are for; it's not scientific and better suited for other classes, hence it doesn't go in the science curriculum. End of debate.
My point is that the lack of a class that is supposed to be about this kind of stuff makes it easier for fundamentalists to inject it into classes that aren't.
"This product launch is brought to you by Blizzard and Mozilla"...
See, now that's a game I'm looking forward to!
Yeah, but Blizzard first put up the splash screen and then apparently forgot to upload the rest of the site for an hour or so. You got the splash screen followed by a 404.
When I looked at those screenshots my first thought was: "Damn, this looks like Neverwinter Nights with a new engine."
Of course if it played like NWN with a new engine I'd be all over it. I doubt it, though.
We have shown that rapidly compressing a sufficiently large piece of enriched uranium results in a big explosion. Hiroshima and Nagasaki don't prove that atoms were actually split.
With a bit of legwork I'm sure I could come up with an argumentation that convinced certain politicians that atomic theory is really just a theory and shouldn't be taught as truth in school.
It would be most correct to put it into a religion class. Yes, there should be a religion class in school; religion is too important to be ignorant about it. No, Sunday school isn't useful; that only teaches you stuff about your own religion. Religion class would teach you about other religions and about philosophical questions in the context of one's own religion (eg. creation vs. evolution vs. Intelligent Design).
If you guys had that I'd assume that the religious types would spend less time trying to invade all other classes.