They use ASP.NET with VB.Net, which is Object Oriented, and any day for me a better environment to develop web apps than php or perl (ya so burn me)
Can anyone please, please, please explain to me how "Response.Write()" is better than "echo" or "Response.End()" is better than "exit"? Given the nature of objects (inheritance, polymorphism, abstraction and encapsulation), are the Request, Response, or Server objects even necessary? What's wrong with $_GET?
Don't get me wrong, I love objects. The problem with.Net is that everything is an object whether is makes sense or not.
I think the appropriate mod for this would be "redundant" or perhaps offtopic, not troll. Anyone who would mod this as a troll either has no sense of humor or perhaps has never heard the song 50 Ways to Leave Your Lover. You gotta wonder what Paul Simon thinks of this version?
Personally, I'd love to hear a new rendition of You Can Call Me Al crafted for Slashdot.
At what point does replacing a ten grand a year employee with a 100 grand machine become impractical?
For small farms, this could be a very practical idea. If the farmer spends most of his time milking then he doesn't have time to do other stuff like fix broken equipment. If you have to pay someone to fix a broken tractor rather than doing it yourself, you're going to pay something more in the $50-$100/hr range. At these rates, burning $100K doesn't take long.
The government, in its infinite wisdom, has decided that free over the air analog signals should disappear, instantly making all of that equipment obsolete unless a digital converter box is installed.
Actually, this has been coming for a very long time. What the government failed to do was mandate that all new equipment meet the new standards, so many people are still buying TV sets today that won't work tomorrow. It's insane that they're even proposing these changes without having equipment available to the consumer. How pissed do you think John Q. Public will be when he finds out his 1 year old TV set won't work any more? I like McCain, but he's being a total ass on this one. Actually, I think it's just Presidential posturing. After all, he can support the change "for safety's sake" knowing all too well that it will be shot down and he'll still look good.
Agreed. But it's still human nature. In my soc class in college, they had an experiment where they'd arbitrarily break up a class into three groups: rich, middle class, and poor. According to these rules, the rich were virtually omnipotent and could make any rule they wanted. The poor had to suck it up. It was interesting to see that even in a room full of (in reality) middle to upper class kids how illegal behaviors quickly set in. In one class, the "poor" kids actually kidnapped a "rich" girl and held her down the hall for ransom.
I'm not trying to justify anything here. It's just that you have to consider how people will react regardless of the law. Our jails are full of people convicted for the possession and use of illegal drugs. Does this mean that we're winning the war on drugs?
Ok, the story is interesting and all, but did they really think that they'd change the way that a monopoly does business? It would be like getting them to admit that they're on a sinking ship, and that just ain't going to happen. But this is also why I'm such a big believer in free market economics. About time somebody thinks they own the customer, somebody else will out-hussle them and provide better service at a lower price. Regardless of the lawsuits and the piracy and all of the ugliness that currently surrounds the music/video industry, eventually it will all settle down and we'll all forget that this ever happened. A blip in history, I say...
You should move to the West Coast, where it was only 10:48 PDT and you wouldn't have had to get woken up. I was watching the Simpsons when you logged your ticket.
Linux, yes. Windows, no. It's sad, really, because I run Linux nearly exclusively and can't get good power management support for my laptop. It's definitely an Achilles Heel.
As for oil, you seem quite astonishingly well-informed about existence of large economically viable oil reserves within the US boarders. Congratulations, I really think you will be real rich real soon as the US oil companies will pay fortunes for that knowledge.
No they wouldn't, because they already know where it is. There are reserves off the California coast that can't be tapped because of previous oil spills. ANWR contains huge reserves, but Congress prevents drilling. Virtually ever reserve is currently off limits, but that will change as the price of fuel increases.
And speaking of energy, there haven't been any new orders for nuclear reactors in something like 20 years. So even if we don't have enough oil to satisfy our needs, there are other ways to produce energy. Fuel cells are looking very promising for powering vehicles, and research dollars will flow when electrical energy is cheap.
If the US doesn't really need the rest of the world that much, than how much does the rest of the world really need the US?
I don't know how to answer that question. I'd like to say that the rest of the world could live just fine without the US, and that would be alright by me. But the problem is that much of the rest of the world has a welfare mentality, so that any time the US does something good then they expect a piece of the pie. The Internet is an excellent example. We funded the research, built the system, and provided much of the content. Now we're supposed to feel guilty for hanging on to it? I don't think so. If everyone else wants their own "Internet", there's nothing stopping them from building it. It's not the like US is going to invade the nations of the EU if they start hooking up their own systems.
This isn't about any specific tld, this is about all of them. Internet naming in general is a global concern, common to all nations and people using the Internet.
If you believe that, then I'm sure that you'd agree with me that oil production is also a global concern. So would you suggest that the UN take control of the oil fields in Saudi Arabia and Venezuela to ensure that each country gets its "fair share" of the world's oil? There really is no difference, because your argument is that anything which affects the global economy should be under UN control, whereas I would argue that if you want something then you have to pay for it. Personally, I have no problem with paying the Saudis for their oil. They got it, I want it. What's "fair" is for me to pay them for it, not try to steal it from them because I think that they should give it to me.
I have heard France called many things by people who have had to deal with the French... if the French were "pretty much isolated themselves from the rest of the world" then I would think people would have much less reason to bitch about them.
I was thinking more culturally. Anyone who passes laws that prohibit you from creating a web site that's not in French within the borders of France qualifies as an isolationist to me.
Most affected industry would of course be media, both big and small. Big Media Internet presence is basically B2C-channel, which is the type that seems most vulnerable here and with the US media industry being one of the top exporters in the US, I would think the US Big Media would be were the effect is first felt.
I don't know how much you've read Slashdot lately, but people in the US generally don't like big media. I doubt many people would cry if they got hurt in the deal.
Doesn't this assume that all truth tellers are from the Village of Life and all liars are from the Village of Death? I don't remember reading that in the original question.
A woodchuck would chuck as much wood as a woodchuck could chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood.
Wrong!
The "how much" isn't a question of desire, but rather one of capacity and capability. When you say that "A woodchuck would chuck...", you're saying that his desire is to chuck as much wood as possible. But the correct answer is "A woodchuck could chuck...", so that regardless of whether we're talking about lazy woodchucks or industrious woodchucks, the answer is the same. Therefore, the correct answer is indeed...
A woodchuck could chuck as much wood as a woodchuck could, if a woodchuck could chuck wood.
Why is this a great idea? Man has been eating food since the dawn of time and somehow we've managed to live quite nicely without tracking it from start to finish. If you're that paranoid about your food, put in a garden.
Agreed. But when SCO starts making money through this partnership and then turns around and uses that cash to attack the same community that SCO despises, does that make any sense?
SCO not only burned bridges, they set the entire landscape on fire. For a leading player in the F/OSS movement to then hook up with them is very disturbing. Should we expect MySQL developers to suddenly be paid by SCO? What would SCO expect in return?
When I heard the news, I sent an email to MySQL telling them that I thought they were treading on very dangerous ground. If MySQL was surprised by the reaction of the community then maybe they really don't understand their base of support. I kind of feel that way anyway, since last I looked the only way to give them any money is to buy a license. I'd gladly click on a "Donate using PayPal" link and have suggested that they provide a paid club that people can sign up for to help support the cause, but so far neither has appeared.
However, the US much, much more dependent on the rest of world than the rest of the world is dependent on the US.
I'd be interested in knowing what you're thinking here. We are definitely dependent on the rest of the world for oil, but only because we've failed to tap our own reserves, so we could correct that problem. In all seriousness, in what other ways do you think we're dependent on other countries?
In a limited economic war, which the splitting of the Internet essentially would be, the US will lose to the rest of the world. *IF* the rest of the world, or at least most of it, can hold their line and use "the UNInternet" root server, there's not much the US can do but to comply.
So how is it that France has pretty much isolated themselves from the rest of the world and still seem to fare pretty well? Isolationism isn't necessarily a bad thing, and since there's enough interesting stuff in the US then we really don't need content from the rest of the world. I'm not suggesting that we actually implement USInternet, but if the rest of the world wants to gang up on us and try to wrestle away control then I say "screw them". I doubt many people in the US would care, quite frankly, if they couldn't get outside the.com/.net tld address space. I personally visit very few non-US sites, not because I don't like them, but because I find what I need within US borders.
What I find fascinating about this whole thing is that the UN is really trying to "nationalize" the Internet, much the way Saudi Arabia nationalized its oil fields decades ago. I'm totally into giving control to a national tld to its owning country (let the Russians have.ru), but just because few people want these doesn't mean that they should get ours. If you buy into that argument then Google better watch its back when the UN decides that it's the best search engine in town. After all, why should a company in the US be allowed to control how the contents of the Internet are indexed? Better let the UN run Google's servers.
USInternet tells UNInternet to FOAD. For a while, UN/EUInternet gets some traction, but soon the EU companies loose access to US markets. Since the companies of the EU already have.com addresses, they continue to use them and UNInternet looses.
USInternet provides a UNInternet service first. Some will use UNInternet for philisophical reasons. Most continue to use USInternet's system and UNInternet fails miserably because it can't convince enough people to switch.
Slashdot Mirror
I have one of these (ok, not this model scanner, but an Epson with transparency). It's meant for slides, not full-sized x-rays.
Can anyone please, please, please explain to me how "Response.Write()" is better than "echo" or "Response.End()" is better than "exit"? Given the nature of objects (inheritance, polymorphism, abstraction and encapsulation), are the Request, Response, or Server objects even necessary? What's wrong with $_GET?
Don't get me wrong, I love objects. The problem with .Net is that everything is an object whether is makes sense or not.
Personally, I'd love to hear a new rendition of You Can Call Me Al crafted for Slashdot.
For small farms, this could be a very practical idea. If the farmer spends most of his time milking then he doesn't have time to do other stuff like fix broken equipment. If you have to pay someone to fix a broken tractor rather than doing it yourself, you're going to pay something more in the $50-$100/hr range. At these rates, burning $100K doesn't take long.
Actually, I found it quite interesting that they chose to call this thing the Voluntary Milking System (VMS). In my day, VMS ran on a VAX.
So that must explain why there are no women who hang out on Slashdot.
Actually, this has been coming for a very long time. What the government failed to do was mandate that all new equipment meet the new standards, so many people are still buying TV sets today that won't work tomorrow. It's insane that they're even proposing these changes without having equipment available to the consumer. How pissed do you think John Q. Public will be when he finds out his 1 year old TV set won't work any more? I like McCain, but he's being a total ass on this one. Actually, I think it's just Presidential posturing. After all, he can support the change "for safety's sake" knowing all too well that it will be shot down and he'll still look good.
I'm not trying to justify anything here. It's just that you have to consider how people will react regardless of the law. Our jails are full of people convicted for the possession and use of illegal drugs. Does this mean that we're winning the war on drugs?
Ok, the story is interesting and all, but did they really think that they'd change the way that a monopoly does business? It would be like getting them to admit that they're on a sinking ship, and that just ain't going to happen. But this is also why I'm such a big believer in free market economics. About time somebody thinks they own the customer, somebody else will out-hussle them and provide better service at a lower price. Regardless of the lawsuits and the piracy and all of the ugliness that currently surrounds the music/video industry, eventually it will all settle down and we'll all forget that this ever happened. A blip in history, I say...
You should move to the West Coast, where it was only 10:48 PDT and you wouldn't have had to get woken up. I was watching the Simpsons when you logged your ticket.
Linux, yes. Windows, no. It's sad, really, because I run Linux nearly exclusively and can't get good power management support for my laptop. It's definitely an Achilles Heel.
What do you have against suspend/hibernate?
Anyone know if FreeBSD is still using the big lock for SMP?
No they wouldn't, because they already know where it is. There are reserves off the California coast that can't be tapped because of previous oil spills. ANWR contains huge reserves, but Congress prevents drilling. Virtually ever reserve is currently off limits, but that will change as the price of fuel increases.
And speaking of energy, there haven't been any new orders for nuclear reactors in something like 20 years. So even if we don't have enough oil to satisfy our needs, there are other ways to produce energy. Fuel cells are looking very promising for powering vehicles, and research dollars will flow when electrical energy is cheap.
If the US doesn't really need the rest of the world that much, than how much does the rest of the world really need the US?
I don't know how to answer that question. I'd like to say that the rest of the world could live just fine without the US, and that would be alright by me. But the problem is that much of the rest of the world has a welfare mentality, so that any time the US does something good then they expect a piece of the pie. The Internet is an excellent example. We funded the research, built the system, and provided much of the content. Now we're supposed to feel guilty for hanging on to it? I don't think so. If everyone else wants their own "Internet", there's nothing stopping them from building it. It's not the like US is going to invade the nations of the EU if they start hooking up their own systems.
This isn't about any specific tld, this is about all of them. Internet naming in general is a global concern, common to all nations and people using the Internet.
If you believe that, then I'm sure that you'd agree with me that oil production is also a global concern. So would you suggest that the UN take control of the oil fields in Saudi Arabia and Venezuela to ensure that each country gets its "fair share" of the world's oil? There really is no difference, because your argument is that anything which affects the global economy should be under UN control, whereas I would argue that if you want something then you have to pay for it. Personally, I have no problem with paying the Saudis for their oil. They got it, I want it. What's "fair" is for me to pay them for it, not try to steal it from them because I think that they should give it to me.
I have heard France called many things by people who have had to deal with the French ... if the French were "pretty much isolated themselves from the rest of the world" then I would think people would have much less reason to bitch about them.
I was thinking more culturally. Anyone who passes laws that prohibit you from creating a web site that's not in French within the borders of France qualifies as an isolationist to me.
Most affected industry would of course be media, both big and small. Big Media Internet presence is basically B2C-channel, which is the type that seems most vulnerable here and with the US media industry being one of the top exporters in the US, I would think the US Big Media would be were the effect is first felt.
I don't know how much you've read Slashdot lately, but people in the US generally don't like big media. I doubt many people would cry if they got hurt in the deal.
AFAIK, only one of them has had to replace the factory-original rubber band.
Doesn't this assume that all truth tellers are from the Village of Life and all liars are from the Village of Death? I don't remember reading that in the original question.
Wrong!
The "how much" isn't a question of desire, but rather one of capacity and capability. When you say that "A woodchuck would chuck...", you're saying that his desire is to chuck as much wood as possible. But the correct answer is "A woodchuck could chuck...", so that regardless of whether we're talking about lazy woodchucks or industrious woodchucks, the answer is the same. Therefore, the correct answer is indeed...
A woodchuck could chuck as much wood as a woodchuck could, if a woodchuck could chuck wood.
How many cans can a canner can, if a canner can can cans?
Why is this a great idea? Man has been eating food since the dawn of time and somehow we've managed to live quite nicely without tracking it from start to finish. If you're that paranoid about your food, put in a garden.
How about washing your bedding every once in a while? Buy white sheets so you can use lots of bleach.
What, no Google map hack with webcam links?
Agreed. But when SCO starts making money through this partnership and then turns around and uses that cash to attack the same community that SCO despises, does that make any sense?
SCO not only burned bridges, they set the entire landscape on fire. For a leading player in the F/OSS movement to then hook up with them is very disturbing. Should we expect MySQL developers to suddenly be paid by SCO? What would SCO expect in return?
When I heard the news, I sent an email to MySQL telling them that I thought they were treading on very dangerous ground. If MySQL was surprised by the reaction of the community then maybe they really don't understand their base of support. I kind of feel that way anyway, since last I looked the only way to give them any money is to buy a license. I'd gladly click on a "Donate using PayPal" link and have suggested that they provide a paid club that people can sign up for to help support the cause, but so far neither has appeared.
I'd be interested in knowing what you're thinking here. We are definitely dependent on the rest of the world for oil, but only because we've failed to tap our own reserves, so we could correct that problem. In all seriousness, in what other ways do you think we're dependent on other countries?
In a limited economic war, which the splitting of the Internet essentially would be, the US will lose to the rest of the world. *IF* the rest of the world, or at least most of it, can hold their line and use "the UNInternet" root server, there's not much the US can do but to comply.
So how is it that France has pretty much isolated themselves from the rest of the world and still seem to fare pretty well? Isolationism isn't necessarily a bad thing, and since there's enough interesting stuff in the US then we really don't need content from the rest of the world. I'm not suggesting that we actually implement USInternet, but if the rest of the world wants to gang up on us and try to wrestle away control then I say "screw them". I doubt many people in the US would care, quite frankly, if they couldn't get outside the .com/.net tld address space. I personally visit very few non-US sites, not because I don't like them, but because I find what I need within US borders.
What I find fascinating about this whole thing is that the UN is really trying to "nationalize" the Internet, much the way Saudi Arabia nationalized its oil fields decades ago. I'm totally into giving control to a national tld to its owning country (let the Russians have .ru), but just because few people want these doesn't mean that they should get ours. If you buy into that argument then Google better watch its back when the UN decides that it's the best search engine in town. After all, why should a company in the US be allowed to control how the contents of the Internet are indexed? Better let the UN run Google's servers.
This is clearly a case where /. has WTF.