umm... you don't need a signature to agree to any kind of contract.
do you think any of the oss libraries require the user to sign something? of course not. simply using it means they agree to the terms of the license.
of course, i would imagine that they would need a patent or something to really enforce this in the court of law.. This is wrong. You are not bound to accept the GPL in any country I know of; if you do not accept the GPL, normal copyright applies. Which, in practical terms, means that you cannot redistribute the application.
Well, for my case, even if I have to use Java for whatever reason, I would first develop it in Linux... the best developer OS around, in my not so humble opinion. E.g, the tools are all available on your fingertips right out of the box. Then I would test it on whatever platform it is to run on, since Java is so very sensitive to the target platform. So using Solaris as a test would only be relevant if it has to run there. But maybe Solaris is more familiar to people from the windowsworld, I wouldn't know.
So, McSmarty, how do I
- position an image on page 4 of my document?
You don't, nor do you want to. But you can anchor, float or bind the images to the text easily enough. This would be handled by css... for the HTML side, it would just be div and object tags --- not that you would ever see them, since this is an word app.
- add footnotes?
<p class="footnote">My footnote</p> with the appropriate CSS rule (presumably something like float: page or whatever.)
- embed fields (date, last editor...)?
Using XML entities, presumably
- mark the embedded TOC as TOC so that it gets regenerated on reload?
Regenerated on reload? Come on, have some ambition.. it should be in sync at all times. Anyway, by keeping tracks of the header tags, presumably.
HTML is *not* a description language suitable for word processing in its current state, and it is unclear it can be made so without sacrificing device indepence.
XHTML+CSS would need some expansions... but probably not much. A good layout program propably doesn't care about the device, but if it did, there are already @media tags to handle this situations. There are also a couple of other truly dedicated layout namespaces on w3 to consider.
But all this matters not. This is politics. Sadly.
It's an email thing... it means emphasized, and alludes to underscoring. The other common ones are/xxx/ for italic, and *xxx* for bold. Many IRC email clients actually substitute the appropriate style to such constructs.
No apt equivalent for Mac? I'm sorry for you. I'd suggest you try Kubuntu or maybe even Debian, and see your software woes disappear. Well,except for games, but from what I hear Mac are just as overlooked as Linux by the publishers:/ (Not trying to evangelize here, use what you find best, it's just friendly suggestions:) )
Instead of pirating Matlab, you might want to take a look at Octave. It's Open Source, it's good, and the support is amazing. Disclaimer: I've never tried the visiulation addon to Octave, so I've no idea how that works. However, if you want a powerful matrix-manipulation program, Octave is very good. Be sure to get 2.9.9... that's the good one. And the interface is matlab compatible, so no learning curve for you.
No idea about an AutoCAD, never done CAD in my life.
Most commercial programs do it this way, it is by far the easiest way for non-free applications. But remember, it is not just HD and bandwidth... it's also RAM and disk cache. Not to mention, when a security bug is found in libxyz, it is going to be really fun upgrading all those packages that includes libxyz.
All in all, I do not think that static linking is a good approach, except maybe for a few "emergency" class packages.
Hehe. So far, from my limited experiences, which mostly comes from the curses of my co-worker, it is hard to install (hint: Use VMWare. Forget about installing directly, it's just too painful), the tools are awful, tar especially elicit a lot of curses (probably, GNU tools would help, but if you are going Linux... why not go all the way?) and the OS is rather unstable (As in crashed hard. No boot after crash.)
But other than that it is probably fine. But then, Linux is free, GPL and better, and so is BSD from what I hear. Well, except the GPL, obviously:)
Of course, this is completely anecdotal from one (1) install. I encourage anyone with a lot of free time to waste to try for himself.
all a Sudoku puzzle is, at it's core, is a depth first search
For a laugh, I once formulated sudoku solving as an 9x9x9 integer problem, (well, boolean). Of course, branch&bound is essentially a search in a tree, too, though I don't think you need to branch many times for this type of problems. No surprise, it was dog slow, taking a second to solve a soduku problem:o)
You obviously personally feel something for the good old encycleopedia, and find them very useful. In my personally experience, a encyclopedia is full if outdated stuff, and lots of worthless history. To me, they were only marginally use, and are now only a curiosity. The difference is probably related to differences in our interests, and I do not bemoan these differences.
However, I do find arguments about Wikipedia's usefulness a bit weird. It is obviously useful for a lot of people. It is so because it is correct or close enough (almost) all the times those people have looked something up, otherwise those people would've been burnt too often to find it useful. So... from where I am standing, you are arguing with facts, which is a foolhardy thing to do. Unless you are religius, anyway.
Note that I am sure that your description is true from your point of view... but you seem to have this idea that because wikipedia is useless for you, it must be useless for everybody. I have made countless of lookups on wikipedia, often as starting points, and I have yet to encounter an article that turned out to be wrong. Thus it is useful to at least one person --- and I happen to know a few more people that find it useful.
I am sorry you feel that wikipedia is dragging other encycleopedias through the dust... but "an online encycleopedia that everyone can edit" describes wikipedia so concisely and precisely that you will just have to live with it. I don't think any users of wikipedia is unaware of the "anyone can edit" part, nor do I truly believe that they are not aware of the consequences of this, or the difference betwen the old hide and paper work (which these days probably are hide and paper no more).
Only thing that you illustrated is that while overal popularity of given subject is the natural coverage decider in Wikipedia, not so much in commercial encyclopedias.
I wasn't really trying to make a point. Just trying to see if Britannia online was worth anything to me, being somewhat uninterested in the history of furniture. I suspect a Chinese, female manager would feel much the same way, if that makes it any better:)
I'll keep that in mind should I ever need a huge article on history of furniture;)
On a more serious note, let me pick three topics at random. How much does it say about say about Linear programming (an algorithm)? How about the straw man arguments (logical fallicy)? Richard Dawkins (notable person, humanist, atheist)?
I'm not going to look up how much Wikipedia does say about these topics, but I would be surprised if all of these were not present in Wikipedia.
The patent bomb? True, but that applies to all software (and hardware for that matter) and is thus irrelevant when it comes to the GPL. Sure, some malicious person could add patented code to the some existing GPL project and try to use this for some quick get-rich-scheme, but this is entirely possible for an employee at Microsoft or whatever, too. In fact, this might well be what have happened in a few of those cases.
Also, most free countries don't have software patents, and for those it doesn't matter at all.
So in conclusion: That problem is no more relevant for OSS than for proprietary software, except that someone might actually have a chance to spot the problem before the court case arrives, and if it happens, a quick patch can tear out the problematic code, disable that subset of functionality and have you up and running in a few days. For proprietary software... it would take weeks, if not more.
It looks as is if it was made by graphViz, which draws diagrams based on a textfile containing the dependencies. So it's probably fair enough in that sense, but the posting the number of edges and the number of nodes would probably be nice as well. Though I'd prefer the source for those 2 images:D
but GPL is a "bomb". Not a "time bomb" (for the explosion is not certain), but a remotely activated one whether or not you trust the people, who hold the activator, you'd be comfortable without the bomb entirely.
The problem with the above is that it is untrue. Nothing anyone does can prevent me from using & distributing any OSS software, as long as I don't distribute binaries without the source, suitably licensed. So please, tell us what this bomb is? At worst, the software could be abandoned or closed, which is always the risk with any software --- no matter the license. At least, with OSS, you have the source.
How did this get modded troll? Funny maybe. The roman numerals were a nice touch, but probably too subtle for this crowd. But it was a joke pertaining to the article, and not one of the overwrought ones, either.
Ah well, I suppose the religious types didn't like the slam to the basis of all religion, i.e. irrationality.
I really don't think starting a thread is hard in any reasonably modern language, essentially boiling down to creating a Thread object, and then starting it (like your example). The hard part is managing access to shared resources, which is a pain in the butt, rife with possibilities for race conditions. Sort of like doing stringhandling in C, but without critical errors and security breaches being so easy to spot and fix:) Java provides some nice tools to do the locking and so forth, but the entire burdening of finding out what to lock and what not is left up to the programmer. That Java does not have a const qualifier makes it a bit more fun than it might have been...
While it is true that the climate has and does change over time, the current situation has 2 major differences.
It's caused at least in part by humans
It is happening faster than normal for climate variations
It is going to costs us (you, me, everyone) quite a lot of Euros
I agree this is not doomsday, humanity will most likely survive with no extreme dieoff etc. However, it would be cheaper to reduce emition of carbondioxide.
I know I am presenting this as facts. I would not have done so 10 years ago, but today, all of this seems very certain.
Re:Genuine question about perl vs ruby
on
Lisp and Ruby
·
· Score: 1
And 0 being true is the least surprising behaviour, now?
Yeah, I hate that! It is supposed to be "0 but true" that is true.
Man, I feel so sorry for you religious types, with all that self-denial built in. Everything seem so much easier and happier with atheism and belief in humans instead. In any case, I won't bother you any more. Good luck with your life:D
We are tested by many trials in life. This is one of them.
It is hard to see why an omniscient (all-knowing, I case I got the English wrong) being would need or want to test anything. Except out of spite, of course:)
Ah. I wasn't aware of that. So empirical people keep two sets of volume measurements?? Sort of like cubic decimeters and liters, without the easy conversion? I suppose that makes sense, and explains how people can do without an easy conversion. Still, the issue must arise sometimes, as when wondering how many gallons of water a 2 yards x 14''x 20'' bathtub can contain;)
Well, there's an argument to be made that sex is more harmful to children than violence.
Well, studies in this country (DK) seems to say that the impact is weak, though it seems to be important to make it clear to children that pornographic movies and such are fiction... it doesn't really work that way. Some talk of other problems, like girl beginning to play big girls games, like playing with make-up, dressing up and such, before they should (but other things are blamed for this too, including contaminants in soft plastics, so who knows?). Not exactly "scarred for life", though. That is what I based my assumption on: from studies.
A have to pick on one more point... you seem to imply that older children beat younger ones is rare compared to the older children assaulting younger sexually? That is not my experience, nor have I ever heard this before. Do you have anything to back that up? As for why either thing... there are so many theories, it's hard to tell. From what I've heard, alcohol, e.g., is to blame for more disturbed children than movies/comics/games/scare-of-the-day ever was. I don't have any studies to back this, though.
But it is interesting what you say. So people are protecting children from sex over violence because they actually think it is more harmful to them? That is very surprising to me. I wonder if this is more common among the superstitious or the rationalists.
So God made humans have these "urges and desires" all the time, and yet it is wrong if you act upon them before marriage? What a bastard! That's like giving a thirsty man a bottle of water and telling him he cannot drink it. Or a great painter a set of brushes and forbid him to paint.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, for my case, even if I have to use Java for whatever reason, I would first develop it in Linux... the best developer OS around, in my not so humble opinion. E.g, the tools are all available on your fingertips right out of the box. Then I would test it on whatever platform it is to run on, since Java is so very sensitive to the target platform. So using Solaris as a test would only be relevant if it has to run there. But maybe Solaris is more familiar to people from the windowsworld, I wouldn't know.
- position an image on page 4 of my document?
You don't, nor do you want to. But you can anchor, float or bind the images to the text easily enough. This would be handled by css... for the HTML side, it would just be div and object tags --- not that you would ever see them, since this is an word app.
- add footnotes?<p class="footnote">My footnote</p> with the appropriate CSS rule (presumably something like float: page or whatever.)
- embed fields (date, last editor...)?Using XML entities, presumably
- mark the embedded TOC as TOC so that it gets regenerated on reload?Regenerated on reload? Come on, have some ambition.. it should be in sync at all times. Anyway, by keeping tracks of the header tags, presumably.
HTML is *not* a description language suitable for word processing in its current state, and it is unclear it can be made so without sacrificing device indepence.XHTML+CSS would need some expansions... but probably not much. A good layout program propably doesn't care about the device, but if it did, there are already @media tags to handle this situations. There are also a couple of other truly dedicated layout namespaces on w3 to consider.
But all this matters not. This is politics. Sadly.
It's an email thing... it means emphasized, and alludes to underscoring. The other common ones are /xxx/ for italic, and *xxx* for bold. Many IRC email clients actually substitute the appropriate style to such constructs.
No apt equivalent for Mac? I'm sorry for you. I'd suggest you try Kubuntu or maybe even Debian, and see your software woes disappear. Well,except for games, but from what I hear Mac are just as overlooked as Linux by the publishers :/ (Not trying to evangelize here, use what you find best, it's just friendly suggestions :) )
Instead of pirating Matlab, you might want to take a look at Octave. It's Open Source, it's good, and the support is amazing. Disclaimer: I've never tried the visiulation addon to Octave, so I've no idea how that works. However, if you want a powerful matrix-manipulation program, Octave is very good. Be sure to get 2.9.9... that's the good one. And the interface is matlab compatible, so no learning curve for you.
No idea about an AutoCAD, never done CAD in my life.
Most commercial programs do it this way, it is by far the easiest way for non-free applications. But remember, it is not just HD and bandwidth... it's also RAM and disk cache. Not to mention, when a security bug is found in libxyz, it is going to be really fun upgrading all those packages that includes libxyz.
All in all, I do not think that static linking is a good approach, except maybe for a few "emergency" class packages.
Hehe. So far, from my limited experiences, which mostly comes from the curses of my co-worker, it is hard to install (hint: Use VMWare. Forget about installing directly, it's just too painful), the tools are awful, tar especially elicit a lot of curses (probably, GNU tools would help, but if you are going Linux... why not go all the way?) and the OS is rather unstable (As in crashed hard. No boot after crash.)
But other than that it is probably fine. But then, Linux is free, GPL and better, and so is BSD from what I hear. Well, except the GPL, obviously :)
Of course, this is completely anecdotal from one (1) install. I encourage anyone with a lot of free time to waste to try for himself.
From my experience with Solaris, I assume that you mean he is going to love his Dells after trying Solaris :p
For a laugh, I once formulated sudoku solving as an 9x9x9 integer problem, (well, boolean). Of course, branch&bound is essentially a search in a tree, too, though I don't think you need to branch many times for this type of problems. No surprise, it was dog slow, taking a second to solve a soduku problem :o)
You obviously personally feel something for the good old encycleopedia, and find them very useful. In my personally experience, a encyclopedia is full if outdated stuff, and lots of worthless history. To me, they were only marginally use, and are now only a curiosity. The difference is probably related to differences in our interests, and I do not bemoan these differences.
However, I do find arguments about Wikipedia's usefulness a bit weird. It is obviously useful for a lot of people. It is so because it is correct or close enough (almost) all the times those people have looked something up, otherwise those people would've been burnt too often to find it useful. So... from where I am standing, you are arguing with facts, which is a foolhardy thing to do. Unless you are religius, anyway.
Note that I am sure that your description is true from your point of view... but you seem to have this idea that because wikipedia is useless for you, it must be useless for everybody. I have made countless of lookups on wikipedia, often as starting points, and I have yet to encounter an article that turned out to be wrong. Thus it is useful to at least one person --- and I happen to know a few more people that find it useful.
I am sorry you feel that wikipedia is dragging other encycleopedias through the dust... but "an online encycleopedia that everyone can edit" describes wikipedia so concisely and precisely that you will just have to live with it. I don't think any users of wikipedia is unaware of the "anyone can edit" part, nor do I truly believe that they are not aware of the consequences of this, or the difference betwen the old hide and paper work (which these days probably are hide and paper no more).
I wasn't really trying to make a point. Just trying to see if Britannia online was worth anything to me, being somewhat uninterested in the history of furniture. I suspect a Chinese, female manager would feel much the same way, if that makes it any better :)
I'll keep that in mind should I ever need a huge article on history of furniture ;)
On a more serious note, let me pick three topics at random. How much does it say about say about Linear programming (an algorithm)? How about the straw man arguments (logical fallicy)? Richard Dawkins (notable person, humanist, atheist)?
I'm not going to look up how much Wikipedia does say about these topics, but I would be surprised if all of these were not present in Wikipedia.
The patent bomb? True, but that applies to all software (and hardware for that matter) and is thus irrelevant when it comes to the GPL. Sure, some malicious person could add patented code to the some existing GPL project and try to use this for some quick get-rich-scheme, but this is entirely possible for an employee at Microsoft or whatever, too. In fact, this might well be what have happened in a few of those cases.
Also, most free countries don't have software patents, and for those it doesn't matter at all.
So in conclusion: That problem is no more relevant for OSS than for proprietary software, except that someone might actually have a chance to spot the problem before the court case arrives, and if it happens, a quick patch can tear out the problematic code, disable that subset of functionality and have you up and running in a few days. For proprietary software... it would take weeks, if not more.
It looks as is if it was made by graphViz, which draws diagrams based on a textfile containing the dependencies. So it's probably fair enough in that sense, but the posting the number of edges and the number of nodes would probably be nice as well. Though I'd prefer the source for those 2 images :D
The problem with the above is that it is untrue. Nothing anyone does can prevent me from using & distributing any OSS software, as long as I don't distribute binaries without the source, suitably licensed. So please, tell us what this bomb is? At worst, the software could be abandoned or closed, which is always the risk with any software --- no matter the license. At least, with OSS, you have the source.
How did this get modded troll? Funny maybe. The roman numerals were a nice touch, but probably too subtle for this crowd. But it was a joke pertaining to the article, and not one of the overwrought ones, either.
Ah well, I suppose the religious types didn't like the slam to the basis of all religion, i.e. irrationality.
I really don't think starting a thread is hard in any reasonably modern language, essentially boiling down to creating a Thread object, and then starting it (like your example). The hard part is managing access to shared resources, which is a pain in the butt, rife with possibilities for race conditions. Sort of like doing stringhandling in C, but without critical errors and security breaches being so easy to spot and fix :) Java provides some nice tools to do the locking and so forth, but the entire burdening of finding out what to lock and what not is left up to the programmer. That Java does not have a const qualifier makes it a bit more fun than it might have been...
While it is true that the climate has and does change over time, the current situation has 2 major differences.
I agree this is not doomsday, humanity will most likely survive with no extreme dieoff etc. However, it would be cheaper to reduce emition of carbondioxide.
I know I am presenting this as facts. I would not have done so 10 years ago, but today, all of this seems very certain.
Yeah, I hate that! It is supposed to be "0 but true" that is true.
Man, I feel so sorry for you religious types, with all that self-denial built in. Everything seem so much easier and happier with atheism and belief in humans instead. In any case, I won't bother you any more. Good luck with your life :D
It is hard to see why an omniscient (all-knowing, I case I got the English wrong) being would need or want to test anything. Except out of spite, of course :)
Ah. I wasn't aware of that. So empirical people keep two sets of volume measurements?? Sort of like cubic decimeters and liters, without the easy conversion? I suppose that makes sense, and explains how people can do without an easy conversion. Still, the issue must arise sometimes, as when wondering how many gallons of water a 2 yards x 14''x 20'' bathtub can contain ;)
Well, studies in this country (DK) seems to say that the impact is weak, though it seems to be important to make it clear to children that pornographic movies and such are fiction... it doesn't really work that way. Some talk of other problems, like girl beginning to play big girls games, like playing with make-up, dressing up and such, before they should (but other things are blamed for this too, including contaminants in soft plastics, so who knows?). Not exactly "scarred for life", though. That is what I based my assumption on: from studies.
A have to pick on one more point... you seem to imply that older children beat younger ones is rare compared to the older children assaulting younger sexually? That is not my experience, nor have I ever heard this before. Do you have anything to back that up? As for why either thing... there are so many theories, it's hard to tell. From what I've heard, alcohol, e.g., is to blame for more disturbed children than movies/comics/games/scare-of-the-day ever was. I don't have any studies to back this, though.
But it is interesting what you say. So people are protecting children from sex over violence because they actually think it is more harmful to them? That is very surprising to me. I wonder if this is more common among the superstitious or the rationalists.
So God made humans have these "urges and desires" all the time, and yet it is wrong if you act upon them before marriage? What a bastard! That's like giving a thirsty man a bottle of water and telling him he cannot drink it. Or a great painter a set of brushes and forbid him to paint.