My first language was BASIC. Initially on the Texas Instruments TI 99/4A, then on the Commodore 128D. I was 6-8 years old at the time:). Wrote loads of interesting stuff, worked with sprites and simple blocky graphics.
The first languages I was taught were Pascal and FORTRAN. My first real programming job was in Delphi, and from there (after a very short dip into SmallTalk) I moved onto C++ (with a small bit of Ada thrown in) where I stayed for many years before adding C# into the mix. Somewhere along the way I also learned Java, but never really got into it.
Since then I've written programs in most mainstream languages, everything from Perl and Python to Java, Javascript and F#.
The language I remember most fondly is Delphi. Easy and simple on the surface, especially the really easy way to build Windows apps, but with all the power of C++ if you dig deep enough, powerful enough that I got to know and more importantly understand, pointers in Delphi. It's no surprise to me that C# (having the same designer) borrowed so many excellent features from it. I've always considered myself really fortunate that it was Delphi and not Visual Basic that introduced me to Windows programming.
I suspect you are correct at last in part. The more pedestrian lifestyle also extends to commutes. If you don't drive everywhere in your car but instead use public transport your hands and mind are free and magazines are a great way to keep yourself occupied and learn stuff. Also includes, books, audio books, education, newspapers etc.
I did most of an Open University course while commuting to work by train, and also read my monthly Linux Format subscription. When I changed jobs and had to drive I never had time to read the magazine any more (or indeed do courses) and cancelled the subscription.
I disagree. The study is fine to pass peer review.
It clearly stated it's aims and also it's constraints. As such there's nothing wrong with the paper per-se.
I do agree that the paper's scope is very narrow and as they pointed out themselves further study is required. They did try, for example, take into account the complication of scrolling. Another area where I believe zebra-striping would help considerably is if the data is sufficiently large that you must scroll. Another area worth investigating.
As a quick first paper looking at an area that seems to have never been investigated before it does a good job of laying the groundwork for additional papers and studies to follow. It provides a good base line to work from. And additional studies might well show that zebra striping becomes more important for different configurations/quantities of data.
Retroactively making XP less of a resource pig isn't going to be easy I bet. I wonder if they will apply whatever they learn to current and new versions of windows so that in future people won't have to put up with bloated microsoft software.
But what I can't fathom is the animal-like need for vengeance against the poor government employees who lost the data as the result of one of these accidents. Unless we can show that the person was deliberately taking the information off-line and then staging the theft, how can we possibly in good conscience ruin this person's life just because he forgot a rule. These aren't the Queen's guards, we're talking about. These are people who work for the government (take that in any way you want).
The only difference between confidential information on such a laptop and secret data on an equivalent defence laptop is the sticker on it "Secret" is only on the latter. I see no reason why confidential and potentially damaging-in-the-wrong-hands information about citizens should be treated differently in any way from damaging-in-the-wrong-hands information about our defences.
If you lose a laptop containing secret information you're looking at jail, regardless of intent. You were entrusted with that information, it's your job to keep it safe. Most people with security clearances for that type of information are civilian employees in defence companies and government civil servants.
The mechanism and procedures are there for dealing with "secret" information and they should be used. I'd actually argue that a hostile party can do more damage to our country (certainly our economy) with a laptop full of identity information about our citizens than they could ever do with what colour we decided to paint the toilets in our latest submarine.
What makes you think the squirrels are American?
The British intelligence services have always had a lot less money to spend than their American counterparts and as a result they've had to be considerably more inventive. There's even a museum in London about all the strange and whacky gadgets they've used over the years, albeit none newer than a few decades.
Irrespective of who it might be, the concept itself is brilliant; an ingenious tool that if caught makes your target a laughing stock, you win either way.
Well, let's be honest, whenever you are fighting a war and a battle, most deaths are random and pointless. People die because they are in the wrong place at the wrong time. If you have bullets (or spells) flying around all over the place someone will get hit.
The instruction for riflemen has always been to aim low, that way if you miss your target, you still have a chance of hitting the guy behind him. Does that make the death random?
Germany has a similar attitude to healthcare. Everyone is required by law to have healthcare and there are different companies and competition between them. It's basically treated as tax, where you can decide who you pay the tax to and consequently how much you pay (employers pay 50% of the contributions) and there is government legislation in place to prevent unfair discrimination of the type you mention.
There's also the simple fact that the only pre-condition you have when you first get health insurance is death, as you join when you are born, usually through your parent's existing insurance.
If there's no law in place now to prevent people being screwed over by greedy insurance companies then there soon will be. There's also an element of competition involved. Those companies that actually insure people with pre-conditions for reasonable amounts will quickly get a reputation for being fair and people will flock to them. With that many people on their books they can afford to cover those people with existing conditions.
I don't know how many medical insurance companies there are in Mass. atm. but I suspect that might be a lot of consolidation soon, especially if the number of companies is quite large.
The problem isn't ID cards as such, I've lived in Germany for quite some time and carrying your ID card (or a passport) is a legal requirement.
The problem is that the UK government has a piss poor record of implementing IT systems and what's worse the initial plan for the ID card database was a centralised database system. If that is hacked (and given the UK gov's record it *will* be) that's 60 million identities compromised.
Additionally, there's also the question of just how much data they want to store on people. Name and address, and ID number is fair enough. But these people want biometrics, probably social services information (benefits etc), health service information, probably driving license and there's even talk of using the cards as bank/cash cards!
Even beside the number of things that could go wrong in a system like that, there's the final problem that people will rely on the accuracy of the data too much. If the data is compromised, or your ID is stolen, how do you get them to change it?
"Sorry, Mr Smith, but your fingerprints do not match our records, so you cannot change your profile."
"Yes, but I'm telling you my fingerprints are invalid, my ID was hijacked"
"Sorry, but you must have the correct fingerprints to update your profile. Oh.. adn i'm arresting you for impersonating yourself".
Given how the government and it's authorities seem to store absolutely everything they get their grimy mitts on, (masses of totally innocent people have their fingerprints and DNA stored in police databases, and it's nigh on impossible to have them removed) it's time to be afraid... very afraid.
Check out http://www.no2id.net/ for more information.
It works both ways; if you expect Amazon (or any business or individual) to correct an error after the transaction that works in your favor, then you don't have any room to complain when the entity tries to correct an error after the fact in their favor. You are correct as far as you go, but a business has no legal obligation to refund you money that I'm aware of. It comes down to contract law I suspect (plus complications due to consumer protection laws, but IANAL).
A business will do best to give the money back though, simply because if they don't they will get lots of negative press from this person complaining loudly about them. It's a courtesy though, not a requirement.
Now I don't know exactly what Amazon said to their customers, but the most Amazon can do is ask those customers to pay for it, charging customers post fact is blatantly illegal, and even if it isn't in your country that type of thing that can destroy a company's reputation.
Of course the honest people would have reported the strange price. What I'd like to know is how many people reported it vs how many defrauded Amazon.
While the mistake was certainly Amazon's, let's just spare a thought for just what short-sighted and self-centred those opportunists are. A smaller company could fold because of a mistake like this. I suspect that most of those people that abused Amazon's mistake would not waste a moment on regret or guilt if a couple of days from now a headline appeared saying "Amazon bankrupt due to pricing mistake, 100s of jobs lost".
Slashdot Mirror
My first language was BASIC. Initially on the Texas Instruments TI 99/4A, then on the Commodore 128D. I was 6-8 years old at the time :). Wrote loads of interesting stuff, worked with sprites and simple blocky graphics.
The first languages I was taught were Pascal and FORTRAN. My first real programming job was in Delphi, and from there (after a very short dip into SmallTalk) I moved onto C++ (with a small bit of Ada thrown in) where I stayed for many years before adding C# into the mix. Somewhere along the way I also learned Java, but never really got into it.
Since then I've written programs in most mainstream languages, everything from Perl and Python to Java, Javascript and F#.
The language I remember most fondly is Delphi. Easy and simple on the surface, especially the really easy way to build Windows apps, but with all the power of C++ if you dig deep enough, powerful enough that I got to know and more importantly understand, pointers in Delphi. It's no surprise to me that C# (having the same designer) borrowed so many excellent features from it. I've always considered myself really fortunate that it was Delphi and not Visual Basic that introduced me to Windows programming.
I suspect you are correct at last in part. The more pedestrian lifestyle also extends to commutes. If you don't drive everywhere in your car but instead use public transport your hands and mind are free and magazines are a great way to keep yourself occupied and learn stuff. Also includes, books, audio books, education, newspapers etc.
I did most of an Open University course while commuting to work by train, and also read my monthly Linux Format subscription. When I changed jobs and had to drive I never had time to read the magazine any more (or indeed do courses) and cancelled the subscription.
Go it. Thanks a lot John!.
Would love an invite please
martinsgill (gmail)
Apologies...
it should have been "its" in both cases.
oh the shame...
I disagree. The study is fine to pass peer review.
It clearly stated it's aims and also it's constraints. As such there's nothing wrong with the paper per-se.
I do agree that the paper's scope is very narrow and as they pointed out themselves further study is required. They did try, for example, take into account the complication of scrolling. Another area where I believe zebra-striping would help considerably is if the data is sufficiently large that you must scroll. Another area worth investigating.
As a quick first paper looking at an area that seems to have never been investigated before it does a good job of laying the groundwork for additional papers and studies to follow. It provides a good base line to work from. And additional studies might well show that zebra striping becomes more important for different configurations/quantities of data.
Buddhism doesn't require anyone at the top... yet it's considered a religion.
The only difference between confidential information on such a laptop and secret data on an equivalent defence laptop is the sticker on it "Secret" is only on the latter. I see no reason why confidential and potentially damaging-in-the-wrong-hands information about citizens should be treated differently in any way from damaging-in-the-wrong-hands information about our defences.
If you lose a laptop containing secret information you're looking at jail, regardless of intent. You were entrusted with that information, it's your job to keep it safe. Most people with security clearances for that type of information are civilian employees in defence companies and government civil servants.
The mechanism and procedures are there for dealing with "secret" information and they should be used. I'd actually argue that a hostile party can do more damage to our country (certainly our economy) with a laptop full of identity information about our citizens than they could ever do with what colour we decided to paint the toilets in our latest submarine.
What makes you think the squirrels are American? The British intelligence services have always had a lot less money to spend than their American counterparts and as a result they've had to be considerably more inventive. There's even a museum in London about all the strange and whacky gadgets they've used over the years, albeit none newer than a few decades. Irrespective of who it might be, the concept itself is brilliant; an ingenious tool that if caught makes your target a laughing stock, you win either way.
All the deaths were random?
Well, let's be honest, whenever you are fighting a war and a battle, most deaths are random and pointless. People die because they are in the wrong place at the wrong time. If you have bullets (or spells) flying around all over the place someone will get hit.
The instruction for riflemen has always been to aim low, that way if you miss your target, you still have a chance of hitting the guy behind him. Does that make the death random?
Germany has a similar attitude to healthcare. Everyone is required by law to have healthcare and there are different companies and competition between them. It's basically treated as tax, where you can decide who you pay the tax to and consequently how much you pay (employers pay 50% of the contributions) and there is government legislation in place to prevent unfair discrimination of the type you mention.
There's also the simple fact that the only pre-condition you have when you first get health insurance is death, as you join when you are born, usually through your parent's existing insurance.
If there's no law in place now to prevent people being screwed over by greedy insurance companies then there soon will be. There's also an element of competition involved. Those companies that actually insure people with pre-conditions for reasonable amounts will quickly get a reputation for being fair and people will flock to them. With that many people on their books they can afford to cover those people with existing conditions.
I don't know how many medical insurance companies there are in Mass. atm. but I suspect that might be a lot of consolidation soon, especially if the number of companies is quite large.
The problem isn't ID cards as such, I've lived in Germany for quite some time and carrying your ID card (or a passport) is a legal requirement. The problem is that the UK government has a piss poor record of implementing IT systems and what's worse the initial plan for the ID card database was a centralised database system. If that is hacked (and given the UK gov's record it *will* be) that's 60 million identities compromised. Additionally, there's also the question of just how much data they want to store on people. Name and address, and ID number is fair enough. But these people want biometrics, probably social services information (benefits etc), health service information, probably driving license and there's even talk of using the cards as bank/cash cards! Even beside the number of things that could go wrong in a system like that, there's the final problem that people will rely on the accuracy of the data too much. If the data is compromised, or your ID is stolen, how do you get them to change it? "Sorry, Mr Smith, but your fingerprints do not match our records, so you cannot change your profile." "Yes, but I'm telling you my fingerprints are invalid, my ID was hijacked" "Sorry, but you must have the correct fingerprints to update your profile. Oh.. adn i'm arresting you for impersonating yourself". Given how the government and it's authorities seem to store absolutely everything they get their grimy mitts on, (masses of totally innocent people have their fingerprints and DNA stored in police databases, and it's nigh on impossible to have them removed) it's time to be afraid... very afraid. Check out http://www.no2id.net/ for more information.
favor, then you don't have any room to complain when the entity tries to correct an error after the fact in their favor. You are correct as far as you go, but a business has no legal obligation to refund you money that I'm aware of. It comes down to contract law I suspect (plus complications due to consumer protection laws, but IANAL).
A business will do best to give the money back though, simply because if they don't they will get lots of negative press from this person complaining loudly about them. It's a courtesy though, not a requirement.
Now I don't know exactly what Amazon said to their customers, but the most Amazon can do is ask those customers to pay for it, charging customers post fact is blatantly illegal, and even if it isn't in your country that type of thing that can destroy a company's reputation.
Of course the honest people would have reported the strange price. What I'd like to know is how many people reported it vs how many defrauded Amazon.
While the mistake was certainly Amazon's, let's just spare a thought for just what short-sighted and self-centred those opportunists are. A smaller company could fold because of a mistake like this. I suspect that most of those people that abused Amazon's mistake would not waste a moment on regret or guilt if a couple of days from now a headline appeared saying "Amazon bankrupt due to pricing mistake, 100s of jobs lost".