The Twin paradox is about one twin who accelerates and then slows down (while the other hasn't accelerated or changed his speed significantly) and meets the other twin. This is the source of the assymmetry and not the speed itself.
Selecting where you want the program to start takes a single extra click (Before launching the browser), or a couple of clicks if its already launched.
Letting it automatically barf it up on your single tab doesn't let you group things together as you wish. You could ofcourse tell your window manager: "Start browser windows on desktop 6" to get the same effect as tabbed browsing, but this is crappy (as tabbed browsing is).
You don't have to go 'search for apps', because YOU organized them in a way its easy for you to remmember. My financial app? Its in the financial desktop, ofcourse.
The free software licenses also depend on copyrights, but they use them in their originally intended way (To Promote Science and Useful Arts), which is very acceptable.
I don't care about the current copyright laws, but I do care about Promoting Science and Useful Arts, and if evil laws can be used to promote them, so be it. Fight fire with fire.
* what a laughable term for what Napster was about. Yeah, it wasn't "stealing" in the traditional dictionary definition, but what would you have said if someone were "sharing" binary-only modified copies of GPL'd software? Would that still be sharing? Or would it now be stealing?
Its not stealing in neither case (See definition's emphasis on stealing being the removal of something from its rightful owner), in the first case it would surely be copyright infringment, and in the second case, a license violation, perhaps too a copyright infringment.
As long as copyrights are used against their explicitly mentioned goal ("To Promote Science and Useful Arts") and as such have unlimited times [in practice] and do not require publishing the information (keeping programs closed, etc), they will not be honored and protected.
That is, I will not respect copyright in its current form - to make profit for the large companies that funded its legislation.
Besides, its a feature the WM can and should implement (tab-looking window switching) if people like it so much.
Anyhow, why shouldn't I be able to mentally group browsing windows with non-browsing windows? (Music-related, Programming-related, rather than browsing-related or chat-related?)
Its true that creating a hierarchy of windows resolves the problem of 'swamping' the taskbar. However, I do not think that tabs, or "similar program grouping" in the taskbar is the best solution.
This is actually what desktops are for. Just place your browser windows in some desktop[s] and switch to that desktop (And ofcourse, turn off 'show all windows' in the task bar). This has the very important added benefit of being able to group any type of windows (aka: Financial related browser and other program windows in desktop 1, Music related windows in desktop 2, and so on..)
A perfect WM resolves the need for tabs, but good WM's hardly exist, and people tend to like solutions, even if they're very unoptimal and improper.
Funny, my dad's Windows XP is crawling while KDE, especially Konqueror is running fast as hell here. He's also more happy using it as its so much easier for him..
Objective C is even worse. It is a compelete hack around C, its the slowness of Smalltalk, with a syntax as ugly as C++ and even worse. Move to Python, Smalltalk or Lisp instead.
Actually, later reviews of that experiement showed that the experiment's error range was larger than the result itself, and was correct by sheer luck. Later a rerun of the experiement was done to prove it correct, but the original experiement could just as well have suggested the other result.
In Afghanistan all bombs were aimed at the Taliban's warriors. Ofcourse some will miss, but that doesn't make the whole act unjustified.
The enterance to Jenin and the rest of the west bank was aimed to catch specific listed people in Israel's wanted list, and not at an entire population.
Its not me who bought it is a whole nation, but you who bought the line that these attacks are aimed at a people, and not at specific terrorists.
Do you really believe the bombing of Afghanistan, Iraq, or Jenin's houses housing terrorists is unjustified?
What better way do you know of to fight terrorists, or do you think we should all just ignore our families and friends who die going to a restaurant or to their workplace?
Re:Playability
on
Nethack 3.4.0
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Lets see you master Starcraft in 100 hours of gaming:)
And by mastering, I don't mean finishing the single-player game, but being a master of multiplayer matches..
In fact, most games aren't really "mastered" in 100 hours.. finishing the single-player game isn't mastering, and most modern games are geared towards the multiplayer version (Quake 3, Unreal Tournament, Starcraft,...)
Actually, from my experience, programming in a BFS (breadth-first) manner is more productive and motivating than programming in a DFS (depth-first) manner.
You get to see more results and get more satisfaction sooner by showing fewer capabilities in many fields, compared to showing many capabilities in fewer fields.
Have you ever tried KDE? Kicks the crap out of Gnome and Windows. Have you ever tried Konqueror? The best browser for Linux, and probably better than IE, making it the best altogether. Have you ever tried KWin? The best and probably one of the lightest window managers for desktop environments.
The people bashing Mono are not the same as the ones writing KDE, and not for related reasons. (They're basically saying Window compatability is a bad thing, not that the project is too huge for the small group of people).
KDE 2.2.2 is the best GUI and desktop environment for most users (and I include Windows and others here), and just because you didn't try it (and don't try to lie that you did, you obviously haven't), doesn't make it any less useful for the huge amounts of people already using it.
Its not only the hidden pointer problem, but also how conservative GC'ers work.
They actually search your program's memory bytes for data that "looks like" pointers.
This has significant disadvantages:
A Conservative GC has to search through all of your memory bytes to find pointers, whereas a GC-enabled language will know at runtime exactly where the pointers are stored, making it much faster at collecting. This defeats the purpose of using a "fast execution" language in the first place.
A Conservative GC has no way to know which piece of data is a pointer, and which is just data. This means that if you just store random data, you get random pointers, and a conservative GC will simply leak. This is definitely not the "Right way" to work.
The information of which bytes in your program are pointers and which are just data is available at compiletime (and thus it can be available at runtime, too).
Conservative GC is a "hack" around GC-disabled languages to try and get GC functionality, so it cannot use this data and must waste time searching for "pointer-like" data.
There's a JVM or Python interpreter on any platform Mozilla can run. There aren't always C++ compilers or libraries for those platforms. I doubt C and C++ are the most portable, except for tiny hardware which cannot run JVM's or a Python interpreter (in which case, cannot run Mozilla either)
I didn't suggest that C++ is hard to learn because it requires low-level memory management. I suggested it so people understand learning new languages will not be as hard as it was to learn C++ (or Perl).
"How hard is it to manage pointers and free your memory allocations anyways?"
(To those who didn't get it, I was being cynical)
That is the response I usually get when advising to write using high-level languages that take care of memory management. Finding enormous leakage in huge programs almost proves this response wrong. Finding leakage in almost all programs definitely proves it wrong, and you sure will find leakage in almost every large program written in a low-level language like C or C++.
The overuse of low-level languages with increasingly powerful hardware is becoming appearant to more and more people. It seems the "dark side" will be out of the low-level language hell sooner, as Micros~1 is pushing C# and.NET with all their marketing strength.
If you don't want the Linux/*nix world to stay behind, stop using C and C++ where Python and Lisp can be used. Writing in C or C++ instead of a higher-level language can be deemed as a premature optimization, as any specific part of the program can be optimized and written in C when necessary. We all know how evil premature optimization is.
If you write in C or C++ because that's simply what you know, you should not be wary of learning new languages. You should know that C++ is extremely hellish to learn, while Java is a lot simpler, and Python takes at most a day or two!
From my own personal exprience, functional languages are a bit more difficult to learn and grasp, but it seems they perfectly fit some mindsets.
Stop wasting human power on writing destructors and freeing unused memory, when it can all be done automatically.
C, C++ and other pointer-arithmetic enabled languages can only use conservative garbage collection, which is slow and hideous, and defeats the purpose of using a language like C or C++ in the first place.
If you want high-level functions such as garbage collection, just use high-level languages that do it better (Java, Python, etc), profile the result, and write specific slower portions in C or C++.
Slashdot Mirror
succeed and thus helps sources be closed.
The Twin paradox is about one twin who accelerates and then slows down (while the other hasn't accelerated or changed his speed significantly) and meets the other twin. This is the source of the assymmetry and not the speed itself.
Selecting where you want the program to start takes a single extra click (Before launching the browser), or a couple of clicks if its already launched.
Letting it automatically barf it up on your single tab doesn't let you group things together as you wish. You could ofcourse tell your window manager: "Start browser windows on desktop 6" to get the same effect as tabbed browsing, but this is crappy (as tabbed browsing is).
You don't have to go 'search for apps', because YOU organized them in a way its easy for you to remmember. My financial app? Its in the financial desktop, ofcourse.
The free software licenses also depend on copyrights, but they use them in their originally intended way (To Promote Science and Useful Arts), which is very acceptable.
I don't care about the current copyright laws, but I do care about Promoting Science and Useful Arts, and if evil laws can be used to promote them, so be it. Fight fire with fire.
* what a laughable term for what Napster was about. Yeah, it wasn't "stealing" in the traditional dictionary definition, but what would you have said if someone were "sharing" binary-only modified copies of GPL'd software? Would that still be sharing? Or would it now be stealing?
Its not stealing in neither case (See definition's emphasis on stealing being the removal of something from its rightful owner), in the first case it would surely be copyright infringment, and in the second case, a license violation, perhaps too a copyright infringment.
As long as copyrights are used against their explicitly mentioned goal ("To Promote Science and Useful Arts") and as such have unlimited times [in practice] and do not require publishing the information (keeping programs closed, etc), they will not be honored and protected.
That is, I will not respect copyright in its current form - to make profit for the large companies that funded its legislation.
Heard of multiple desktops? :)
Besides, its a feature the WM can and should implement (tab-looking window switching) if people like it so much.
Anyhow, why shouldn't I be able to mentally group browsing windows with non-browsing windows? (Music-related, Programming-related, rather than browsing-related or chat-related?)
Its true that creating a hierarchy of windows resolves the problem of 'swamping' the taskbar. However, I do not think that tabs, or "similar program grouping" in the taskbar is the best solution.
This is actually what desktops are for.
Just place your browser windows in some desktop[s] and switch to that desktop (And ofcourse, turn off 'show all windows' in the task bar). This has the very important added benefit of being able to group any type of windows (aka: Financial related browser and other program windows in desktop 1, Music related windows in desktop 2, and so on..)
A perfect WM resolves the need for tabs, but good WM's hardly exist, and people tend to like solutions, even if they're very unoptimal and improper.
Funny, my dad's Windows XP is crawling while KDE, especially Konqueror is running fast as hell here.
He's also more happy using it as its so much easier for him..
In the Windows case you have to reboot.
In Linux, you just load a loadable module, no recompilation/reboot required.
With the << ofcourse :) (I didn't think preview was necessary for that one :)
You could also easily write:
lock(std::cout 1 2 3);
Objective C is even worse.
It is a compelete hack around C, its the slowness of Smalltalk, with a syntax as ugly as C++ and even worse.
Move to Python, Smalltalk or Lisp instead.
Actually, later reviews of that experiement showed that the experiment's error range was larger than the result itself, and was correct by sheer luck. Later a rerun of the experiement was done to prove it correct, but the original experiement could just as well have suggested the other result.
How soon will it be before Microsoft, and HPQ-sun-aol remain?
:)
As soon as the big guys realize monopolies and cartels are more profitable than competition. Who ever said capitalism worked?
In Afghanistan all bombs were aimed at the Taliban's warriors. Ofcourse some will miss, but that doesn't make the whole act unjustified.
The enterance to Jenin and the rest of the west bank was aimed to catch specific listed people in Israel's wanted list, and not at an entire population.
Its not me who bought it is a whole nation, but you who bought the line that these attacks are aimed at a people, and not at specific terrorists.
Do you really believe the bombing of Afghanistan, Iraq, or Jenin's houses housing terrorists is unjustified?
What better way do you know of to fight terrorists, or do you think we should all just ignore our families and friends who die going to a restaurant or to their workplace?
Lets see you master Starcraft in 100 hours of gaming :)
...)
And by mastering, I don't mean finishing the single-player game, but being a master of multiplayer matches..
In fact, most games aren't really "mastered" in 100 hours.. finishing the single-player game isn't mastering, and most modern games are geared towards the multiplayer version (Quake 3, Unreal Tournament, Starcraft,
Actually, from my experience, programming in a BFS (breadth-first) manner is more productive and motivating than programming in a DFS (depth-first) manner.
You get to see more results and get more satisfaction sooner by showing fewer capabilities in many fields, compared to showing many capabilities in fewer fields.
Have you ever tried KDE?
Kicks the crap out of Gnome and Windows.
Have you ever tried Konqueror?
The best browser for Linux, and probably better than IE, making it the best altogether.
Have you ever tried KWin?
The best and probably one of the lightest window managers for desktop environments.
The people bashing Mono are not the same as the ones writing KDE, and not for related reasons. (They're basically saying Window compatability is a bad thing, not that the project is too huge for the small group of people).
KDE 2.2.2 is the best GUI and desktop environment for most users (and I include Windows and others here), and just because you didn't try it (and don't try to lie that you did, you obviously haven't), doesn't make it any less useful for the huge amounts of people already using it.
They actually search your program's memory bytes for data that "looks like" pointers.
This has significant disadvantages:
A Conservative GC has to search through all of your memory bytes to find pointers, whereas a GC-enabled language will know at runtime exactly where the pointers are stored, making it much faster at collecting. This defeats the purpose of using a "fast execution" language in the first place.
A Conservative GC has no way to know which piece of data is a pointer, and which is just data. This means that if you just store random data, you get random pointers, and a conservative GC will simply leak. This is definitely not the "Right way" to work.
The information of which bytes in your program are pointers and which are just data is available at compiletime (and thus it can be available at runtime, too).
Conservative GC is a "hack" around GC-disabled languages to try and get GC functionality, so it cannot use this data and must waste time searching for "pointer-like" data.
If this doesn't suck, I don't know what does.
There's a JVM or Python interpreter on any platform Mozilla can run.
There aren't always C++ compilers or libraries for those platforms.
I doubt C and C++ are the most portable, except for tiny hardware which cannot run JVM's or a Python interpreter (in which case, cannot run Mozilla either)
I didn't suggest that C++ is hard to learn because it requires low-level memory management.
I suggested it so people understand learning new languages will not be as hard as it was to learn C++ (or Perl).
That's reference counting, not garbage collection.
It frees memory slower than most modern garbage collectors and it doesn't work for cyclic references.
"How hard is it to manage pointers and free your memory allocations anyways?"
.NET with all their marketing strength.
(To those who didn't get it, I was being cynical)
That is the response I usually get when advising to write using high-level languages that take care of memory management. Finding enormous leakage in huge programs almost proves this response wrong. Finding leakage in almost all programs definitely proves it wrong, and you sure will find leakage in almost every large program written in a low-level language like C or C++.
The overuse of low-level languages with increasingly powerful hardware is becoming appearant to more and more people. It seems the "dark side" will be out of the low-level language hell sooner, as Micros~1 is pushing C# and
If you don't want the Linux/*nix world to stay behind, stop using C and C++ where Python and Lisp can be used. Writing in C or C++ instead of a higher-level language can be deemed as a premature optimization, as any specific part of the program can be optimized and written in C when necessary. We all know how evil premature optimization is.
If you write in C or C++ because that's simply what you know, you should not be wary of learning new languages. You should know that C++ is extremely hellish to learn, while Java is a lot simpler, and Python takes at most a day or two!
From my own personal exprience, functional languages are a bit more difficult to learn and grasp, but it seems they perfectly fit some mindsets.
Stop wasting human power on writing destructors and freeing unused memory, when it can all be done automatically.
C, C++ and other pointer-arithmetic enabled languages can only use conservative garbage collection, which is slow and hideous, and defeats the purpose of using a language like C or C++ in the first place.
If you want high-level functions such as garbage collection, just use high-level languages that do it better (Java, Python, etc), profile the result, and write specific slower portions in C or C++.