I'm really over this current misuse of "ontology", which is "the branch of metaphysics that addresses the nature or essential characteristics of being and of things that exist; the study of being qua being". Even if you accept the more recent usage of "a structure of concepts or entities within a domain, organized by relationships; a system model" (which I don't), there's still a lot more involved than knowing "appropriate words to build actionable machine commands".
Putting tags on your del.icio.us links doesn't make you an ontologist any more than using object oriented methodologies makes you a platonist. I think the correct label for those who misappropriate terminology from other domains (for no other seeming reason than to make them sound clever) is "wanker". Hell, call yourselves "wankologists" for all I care, just don't steal from other domains because "tagger" sounds so lame.
Any bets google will soon be offering free web hosting? That will be as soon as Google App Engine goes out of preview. It's not entirely free, but the current "fee threshold" includes "500MB of disk storage, 10GB incoming bandwidth per day, 10GB outgoing bandwidth per day, 200 million megacycles of CPU per day and 2,000 emails per day".
I'm just confused by this. My initial gut reaction is that Negroponte wants to completely scrap what came before, and put his own stamp on the project. But that makes no sense, because it was his project, and his stamp was on it already. My take on this is with his recent decisions alienating the open software & open education crowds from which the OLPC project had been drawing support, his only option is to turn to the ebook crowd and try to drum up enthusiasm there.
Are we ready to invade Thailand and the rest of Asia in order to stop the child porn industries over there? There's an Australian-based group already doing covert rescues from such areas.
I'm sure they'd appreciate some extra funding.
Apple engaged in business with China when they had the MacBooks made there. If I buy a MacBook, you might have an argument that I am engaging in business with China indirectly. But simply using something made in China is not engaging in business with China. The business was concluded when the sale was complete. So by this argument, you should be able to ethically buy child pornography photos, right? After all, that business was concluded long before you saw the product, right?
[A]ccording to Detective Chief Inspector Mick Neville, who heads the Metropolitan Police's Met's Visual Images, Identifications and Detections Office (Viido), billions of pounds have been spent with almost no results to show. Only three percent of crimes have been solved using CCTV footage, and offenders aren't afraid of being caught on video. Det. Chief Inspector Neville [...] described the system as an "utter fiasco" and that "no thought" had gone into implementation.
And not showing his ID is as stupid as it gets. Too bad they didn't search him for weapons (you know where...), when they took him over to the police station.
I would look forward to the inevitable day when your rights are violently raped away if it didn't seem so obvious from your comments that you'd simply enjoy the experience way too much.
something tells me he is tweaking his dialogue to fit his case better.
You and the cop involved should get together; with your combined intuition you should be able to solve most of the world's crimes in no time...
In other words: it doesn't matter what you _feel_ might be happening... if you don't have any discrete evidence for it you're just engaging in defamation.
QM lies at the physical border of observable physics. At the QM boundary, concepts we take for granted such as electrons and the speed of light have different meaning. Humanity has nothing to do with it. At a small scale, the behavior of matter changes.
Would it be more correct to say that the behaviour of matter is the same but that our model of that behaviour is insufficient to continue to predict it at that smaller scale?
I don't see any way that we aren't screwed anyway.
It's probably a good thing then that if some offshoot of humanity survives until the end of the Universe's lifecycle, they undoubtedly won't suffer the same limitation as your contemporary understanding of everything.
No lambdas? Seriously? So the lambda keyword that my copy of Python 2.5 recognises is..what? A local patch? Or simply evidence that you don't have the slightest clue of what you're talking about?
No ternary operator? Firstly, this isn't C, and secondly, you'll be happy to know that people who're unwilling to learn new approaches have bitched often and hard enough that it now exists in a pythonic form: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0308/ You'll find the PEP interesting for at least two reasons (hint: it includes an example that uses a lambda).
No switch statement? What's wrong with using a dictionary dispatch method instead? It's faster.
Confused by the performance of range? Try using the goddamn help:
In [1]: help(range) Help on built-in function range in module __builtin__: range(...) range([start,] stop[, step]) -> list of integers Return a list containing an arithmetic progression of integers. range(i, j) returns [i, i+1, i+2,..., j-1]; start (!) defaults to 0. When step is given, it specifies the increment (or decrement). For example, range(4) returns [0, 1, 2, 3]. The end point is omitted! These are exactly the valid indices for a list of 4 elements.
It seems to be behaving exactly the way it's supposed to, assuming you put aside your preconceptions from other languages and actually take the time to understand how it works.
And you hate the use of double-underscores to indicate an implementation detail, is that correct? I'm guessing that's what your point is, as it appears to be just petty aesthetic sniping.
Yes, Guido, map and filter suck, but only because Python lambdas suck. And nested list comprehensions look awful. And sometimes you really do want a one-liner.
I can imagine that allegedly non-existent lambdas would suck. And if you really hate, as you appear to, everything that makes Python pythonic apart from its use of significant whitespace, I just have to ask: why the hell don't you stick to a language that better fits the way you want to code?
Or better yet, how about sticking to a language you actually seem to know something about? Because puffed up posturing of your multilinguistic abilities aside, you clearly don't know jackshit about Python.
Generally I find that those who push for a "Google OS" are completely unaware of what a "platform" is.
We have working OSes. There's already plenty of competition and interaction in that space. What more do people want? What more could Google offer above what we already have?
I'd support any bending of the law necessary to force Big Brother off the airwaves.
Highlighting the fact that Australia really does currently have the government it deserves.
Anything else to your distaste that the government should get involved in? Surely there's some other subgroup of our population that you'd love to have retroactively turned into criminals...
Come on. Be honest. You've already avoided it. Because anyone who has actually taken the time to assess and understand the underlying practices of agile development wouldn't be talking half the shit that you just did. And by "shit" I mean, "Inventing straw 'managers' who act like over-hyped parodies of the PHB to represent your personal misunderstanding of agile development".
Seriously, any time you start citing as evidence what you believe some mythical representative figure might be thinking, saying or doing, you're really just talking shit and need to stop. Stick to the facts, which unfortunately require experience and not five minutes of juvenile "all managers are retards" rhetoric to actually demonstrate.
If you don't want bluray, just don't buy it. If you don't want a PS3, ditto.
Jesus wept. Every new tech launch. Every new console gen. Like clockwork. Same old bitching about price points, same old conspiracies about fraudulant demos, same old "this company isn't supporting the tech I want/like/own, so they're going to fail" rhetoric.
Doesn't anyone else getting really fucking tired of this, or am I missing the point, is this what we do now?
Slashdot Mirror
Putting tags on your del.icio.us links doesn't make you an ontologist any more than using object oriented methodologies makes you a platonist. I think the correct label for those who misappropriate terminology from other domains (for no other seeming reason than to make them sound clever) is "wanker". Hell, call yourselves "wankologists" for all I care, just don't steal from other domains because "tagger" sounds so lame.
Hmm, open, honest criticism from Krstic vs an anonymous, ad hominem attack; I wonder which one to believe...
I would look forward to the inevitable day when your rights are violently raped away if it didn't seem so obvious from your comments that you'd simply enjoy the experience way too much.
You and the cop involved should get together; with your combined intuition you should be able to solve most of the world's crimes in no time...
In other words: it doesn't matter what you _feel_ might be happening... if you don't have any discrete evidence for it you're just engaging in defamation.
QM lies at the physical border of observable physics. At the QM boundary, concepts we take for granted such as electrons and the speed of light have different meaning. Humanity has nothing to do with it. At a small scale, the behavior of matter changes.
Would it be more correct to say that the behaviour of matter is the same but that our model of that behaviour is insufficient to continue to predict it at that smaller scale?
I don't see any way that we aren't screwed anyway.
It's probably a good thing then that if some offshoot of humanity survives until the end of the Universe's lifecycle, they undoubtedly won't suffer the same limitation as your contemporary understanding of everything.
Not saying that you're ignorant or anything...
Yes, under Australia's revised sedition law.
Amen to that :)
No ternary operator? Firstly, this isn't C, and secondly, you'll be happy to know that people who're unwilling to learn new approaches have bitched often and hard enough that it now exists in a pythonic form: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0308/ You'll find the PEP interesting for at least two reasons (hint: it includes an example that uses a lambda).
No switch statement? What's wrong with using a dictionary dispatch method instead? It's faster.
Confused by the performance of range? Try using the goddamn help:
It seems to be behaving exactly the way it's supposed to, assuming you put aside your preconceptions from other languages and actually take the time to understand how it works.And you hate the use of double-underscores to indicate an implementation detail, is that correct? I'm guessing that's what your point is, as it appears to be just petty aesthetic sniping.
I can imagine that allegedly non-existent lambdas would suck. And if you really hate, as you appear to, everything that makes Python pythonic apart from its use of significant whitespace, I just have to ask: why the hell don't you stick to a language that better fits the way you want to code?
Or better yet, how about sticking to a language you actually seem to know something about? Because puffed up posturing of your multilinguistic abilities aside, you clearly don't know jackshit about Python.
No, you want your GNU decoder ring: "Free As In Beer".
I bet you like to blame rape victims, too.
Advertising. Google Earth + 80% of the world's surface being water == The One Quadzillion Droplet Homepage.
It didn't seem to hold back Tom Strong at all :)
We have working OSes. There's already plenty of competition and interaction in that space. What more do people want? What more could Google offer above what we already have?
Oh, that's easy. George W. Bush's cock.
And lots of it.
Highlighting the fact that Australia really does currently have the government it deserves.
Anything else to your distaste that the government should get involved in? Surely there's some other subgroup of our population that you'd love to have retroactively turned into criminals...
Come on. Be honest. You've already avoided it. Because anyone who has actually taken the time to assess and understand the underlying practices of agile development wouldn't be talking half the shit that you just did. And by "shit" I mean, "Inventing straw 'managers' who act like over-hyped parodies of the PHB to represent your personal misunderstanding of agile development".
Seriously, any time you start citing as evidence what you believe some mythical representative figure might be thinking, saying or doing, you're really just talking shit and need to stop. Stick to the facts, which unfortunately require experience and not five minutes of juvenile "all managers are retards" rhetoric to actually demonstrate.
Whereas arrogant, over-opinionated /. assholes are eternal...
Jesus wept. Every new tech launch. Every new console gen. Like clockwork. Same old bitching about price points, same old conspiracies about fraudulant demos, same old "this company isn't supporting the tech I want/like/own, so they're going to fail" rhetoric.
Doesn't anyone else getting really fucking tired of this, or am I missing the point, is this what we do now?