And in doing so, you completely defeated the purpose - because now their software can sniff everything that goes through your computer, which is the very thing the person wanted to avoid.
I hope I don't go into a building you have designed. The engineers I work with use the mathematics of materials sciences, measurements, and statistics to determine what designs meet the company needs. Granted, there is a lot of "do what we did that worked last time" but those things were based on mathematics. If it is changed, they go through the analysis again.
I work for an embedded systems manufacturer that switched to Windows Embedded as a result of Wind River's horrible support. Fortunately for them, they used VxWorks on Intel, so things are probably going to look good moving forward.
For this company, USB support was the last straw. Wind River knew that lots of USB flash devices didn't work on their OS, and they wanted to charge for the development time to fix their bug AND then the OS upgrade once it was fixed. It eventually got to the point where the company was stockpiling the USB flash drives that worked on VxWorks, since they were getting hard to find.
Finally Wind River they fixed it, but after this company switched OSs. It would have cost over a million dollars for licenses for the new version of the OS that contained the bug fix. Since Intel was on the USB development committees, I expect this problem (and other hardware-related issues) will vanish quickly. I just feel sorry for all the people who used VxWorks on Motorola chips, etc.
HR is not meant to protect employees. They are mindless robots, there to insulate the company from employees who might sue them. They just hand-down absurd contracts and rules, that everyone must constantly violate, so that they always have a leg to stand on when they fire someone. Blame litigious Americans for necessitating this stupidity.
I had a similar experience to yours where I was joining a company and my boss, and his boss, overrode the standard contract when I refused to sign the non-compete. I had to stick to my guns until the 11th hour, but they agreed it was dumb. It was a small company with no HR department.
Compare that to a company with 28k employees, with a big HR department, where the drones simply did not understand the concept that contracts can change. It was the paper everyone signed - they had no comprehension of what it meant, no idea who wrote it or why, or what it did. They were completely divorced from the needs of the company, oblivious to the complaints of my manager, or me. My lawyer informed me the contract was meaningless and unenforceable, so I signed it. (It wasn't a non-compete though, phew!).
And that second company that is constantly in the top 10 - 50 companies to work for, internationally, on multiple different surveys.
Watching TV is very dangerous, and can result in skewed political opinions, loss of brain cells, high electricity use, and obesity (which in men, can lead to the development of breasts). It can make you distracted while driving: you will be thinking about instead of paying attention to the road.
Are they seriously touting hyperthreading as a benefit? It's a dubious-enough feature, but with 4 cores, it really stretches believability. I dare someone to find the one application that benefits from seeing 2 additional fake CPUs when there are already 4 real ones.
The summary is terribly misleading. First, micropayments means literally "microscopic payments" like as in 1/1000th of a dollar. Second, this is not limited to games.
IMHO, micropayments is a huge thing. It would allow for a completely fair way for things like newspapers to charge for content. I don't want to sign-up for each web site that provides me content. Nor do I think advertisements is viable for all businesses. But as an information hog, I would not mind having access to various pay journals like Science, Nature, WSJ, New York Times, Slashdot, etc. - if all I had to do was sign-up in one place, and get charged something that barely adds-up to pocket change. A few dollars a day in premium services would not negatively impact me financially, but it would save me a heck of a lot of hassle.
But I digress... that isn't what this is. This is apps charging for content.
This seems like the usual anti-OOP rant from someone who has never written OOP. These show up on all Slashdot discussions about languages.
OOP is not some crazy high-level abstraction that adds some performance penalty and prevents you from accessing the bare metal. It is a design construct, one that is best expressed with a few additional keywords, than can be implemented in most decently expressive languages. And just in case I get a reply that says "I do know OOP:"
I read a one-page cheat sheet and never attended a single class and passed with flying colours.
I can imagine how that experience would taint you against it. I took a few similarly lame classes at a good university.
But with C++, I instantly lost interest because it's just too damn verbose to do a simple job.
That is provably false. Since almost every C program is a valid C++ program, C++ is by definition, no more verbose than C.
Java OOP is slightly better but still nasty once things get complicated and the underlying "functional" language is basically a C-a-like.
Java is not a functional language.
I worry about what will happen when people *only* code in OOP languages. The abstraction is so large that people forget that they are still telling a computer to handle bits and bytes and suddenly they get lazy.
OOP has nothing to do with this. I can't think of an OOP language that does not allow you to handle bits and bytes.
[Java was] a C-a-like with OO
So is C++.
Throughout your post you talk about how disorganized the class libraries are. If you ever code enterpreise-level software, or need to code something quickly, you will appreciate those libraries. Implementing everything yourself will result in bigger, slower code and longer development cycles.
I recommend learning C# since it has a very organized class library, and using that to dig into what OOP really is. I've even done OOP in assembly language - it's a design paradigm, with zero overhead, a few keywords, and some damn powerfully expressive shortcuts.
(Queue someone posting outdated information about virtuals to try and counter the "zero overhead" part)
Can you explain how C++ does not support parametric polymorphism in its entirety? From the Wikipedia article you quoted:
Today it exists in Standard ML, OCaml, Ada, Haskell, C++, Visual Prolog and others. Java, C#, Visual Basic.NET and Delphi (CodeGear) have each recently introduced "generics" for parametric polymorphism.
Based on the descriptions of how parametric polymorphism works, C++ seems to support it 100%. Are you sure you aren't meaning C#, which has "generics" instead of "templates?"
Most companies specifically forbid you from using office tools for such purpose. And any company I have ever worked for was very clear that any such use was subject to monitoring, which is completely reasonable and logical.
You are way off if you think you can come into a corporate office and make personal calls with any expectation of privacy.
i would assume if my job was ever terminated people wouldn't go through my browser's history and look at all the cookies generated unless it was directly related to my work.
That's a terrible assumption. You should assume the super-opposite: that not only would that do that upon your termination, but that someone is probably assigned to do this periodically for all employees. There may even be an automated tool taking note that I post on Slashdot right now.
The big news everyone seems to be missing is that everyone and their mom will be able to block ads with very little knowledge.
Huh? They can do that now by using one of the many ad blocking extensions. How does the fact that they can do it by writing 80 lines of code make it any easier on them? Sounds much more difficult to me!
Why are people treating this "white roads" thing like something new and exciting and dangerous. Here in the northeast US, interstate highways are white concrete anyway. I assume it is lower maintenance.
...which can be used directly to power a diesel engine".../quote>
Reading between the lines, I theorize that they really mean "which could possibly be used to directly power some form of theoretical diesel engine that does not yet exist, but could be built, although it may not be as clean or efficient."
I don't think they mean that an existing engine would work with it. Can't be sure though.
Cars do no spend the majority of their time idling at traffic lights. Computers (especially servers) however do often end up idling a very large percentage of the time.
Both statements are not universally true.
Taxis, for example, may spend the majority of their time idling. So do big-city rush-hour commuters. And many servers idle 90% of the time, while others idle 10% of the time.
You can't make blanket statements about cars idle time, or computers idle time, since it probably varies 10000:1 based on the usage.
You can legislate away a portion of impulse murder and accident by otherwise law abiding citizens
Agreed. I guess the fact that such laws don't impact crime significantly tells us that these are not a significant portion of murders. It might be that those very same law-abiding citizens are the ones most likely to use their guns to stop crimes, thus canceling out the effect of reduced impulse murders.
Also, if you don't believe that low availability of guns affects their price and availability to criminal elements... well anyway
I hold no such belief. You are probably right: It seems like it should make them more expensive. But that doesn't change the fact that these laws aren't doing anything to reduce gun-related crime.
Since I'm replying, lemme throw out some anecdotes. I live in the perfect gun crime statistic: Baltimore. We have: - High non-gun-related crime - High gun-related crime - Poor schools - Gun control laws
For 30 years, the Baltimore City Council has enacted various gun control laws to no effect. The worldwide statistics show that gun crime is 1) proportional to crime in general 2) inversely proportional to the quality of schools, 3) not proportional to gun control laws. That matches exactly with what happens here.
One day, legislators will realize that the problem is crime and education, not guns. I bet that if every gun in Baltimore was magically transformed into a knife, that the number of knife-related murders would increase by exactly the same amount as the reduction in gun-related murders.
I don't intend to defend the statement about Australia, but it would not be inconsistent with what statistics show about other nations.
The statistics that were quoted on Wikipedia are from a more detailed survey that also cataloged gun ownership and gun control laws across those same countries. In college, I read the entire thing, but I can't find it online anywhere. The results show that legal gun ownership is not proportional to non-suicide gun deaths. Interestingly, if you throw education into the mix, there is a very close correlation between education and non-suicide gun related deaths.
Really it makes sense: Criminals use guns to kill people, and gun laws do not affect criminal gun ownership. Hence, you can't legislate away murder.
There are two implementations: OpenOffice and Microsoft Office. Microsoft Office does it differently from OpenOffice, and you conclude that "only Microsoft handles it very differently?" Or is there another reference implementation to compare to?
Slashdot Mirror
And in doing so, you completely defeated the purpose - because now their software can sniff everything that goes through your computer, which is the very thing the person wanted to avoid.
I hope I don't go into a building you have designed. The engineers I work with use the mathematics of materials sciences, measurements, and statistics to determine what designs meet the company needs. Granted, there is a lot of "do what we did that worked last time" but those things were based on mathematics. If it is changed, they go through the analysis again.
I work for an embedded systems manufacturer that switched to Windows Embedded as a result of Wind River's horrible support. Fortunately for them, they used VxWorks on Intel, so things are probably going to look good moving forward. For this company, USB support was the last straw. Wind River knew that lots of USB flash devices didn't work on their OS, and they wanted to charge for the development time to fix their bug AND then the OS upgrade once it was fixed. It eventually got to the point where the company was stockpiling the USB flash drives that worked on VxWorks, since they were getting hard to find. Finally Wind River they fixed it, but after this company switched OSs. It would have cost over a million dollars for licenses for the new version of the OS that contained the bug fix. Since Intel was on the USB development committees, I expect this problem (and other hardware-related issues) will vanish quickly. I just feel sorry for all the people who used VxWorks on Motorola chips, etc.
So I think the smoke monster got 'em.
Do they similarly tax photographs? How about telephone service? I imagine both are used for sex crimes against children.
HR is not meant to protect employees. They are mindless robots, there to insulate the company from employees who might sue them. They just hand-down absurd contracts and rules, that everyone must constantly violate, so that they always have a leg to stand on when they fire someone. Blame litigious Americans for necessitating this stupidity.
I had a similar experience to yours where I was joining a company and my boss, and his boss, overrode the standard contract when I refused to sign the non-compete. I had to stick to my guns until the 11th hour, but they agreed it was dumb. It was a small company with no HR department.
Compare that to a company with 28k employees, with a big HR department, where the drones simply did not understand the concept that contracts can change. It was the paper everyone signed - they had no comprehension of what it meant, no idea who wrote it or why, or what it did. They were completely divorced from the needs of the company, oblivious to the complaints of my manager, or me. My lawyer informed me the contract was meaningless and unenforceable, so I signed it. (It wasn't a non-compete though, phew!).
And that second company that is constantly in the top 10 - 50 companies to work for, internationally, on multiple different surveys.
I disagree.
Watching TV is very dangerous, and can result in skewed political opinions, loss of brain cells, high electricity use, and obesity (which in men, can lead to the development of breasts). It can make you distracted while driving: you will be thinking about instead of paying attention to the road.
No, they are not. And the wikipedia articles you cited do not support your statement.
Executive Orders are like the CEO of the company saying "We are going to do it this way" so you following it because he can fire you.
Are they seriously touting hyperthreading as a benefit? It's a dubious-enough feature, but with 4 cores, it really stretches believability. I dare someone to find the one application that benefits from seeing 2 additional fake CPUs when there are already 4 real ones.
Same story, but it was bowling. And I was just a kid who wanted to go bowling - I didn't know if I was signed-up or not. :-)
The summary is terribly misleading. First, micropayments means literally "microscopic payments" like as in 1/1000th of a dollar. Second, this is not limited to games.
IMHO, micropayments is a huge thing. It would allow for a completely fair way for things like newspapers to charge for content. I don't want to sign-up for each web site that provides me content. Nor do I think advertisements is viable for all businesses. But as an information hog, I would not mind having access to various pay journals like Science, Nature, WSJ, New York Times, Slashdot, etc. - if all I had to do was sign-up in one place, and get charged something that barely adds-up to pocket change. A few dollars a day in premium services would not negatively impact me financially, but it would save me a heck of a lot of hassle.
But I digress... that isn't what this is. This is apps charging for content.
I read a one-page cheat sheet and never attended a single class and passed with flying colours.
I can imagine how that experience would taint you against it. I took a few similarly lame classes at a good university.
But with C++, I instantly lost interest because it's just too damn verbose to do a simple job.
That is provably false. Since almost every C program is a valid C++ program, C++ is by definition, no more verbose than C.
Java OOP is slightly better but still nasty once things get complicated and the underlying "functional" language is basically a C-a-like.
Java is not a functional language.
I worry about what will happen when people *only* code in OOP languages. The abstraction is so large that people forget that they are still telling a computer to handle bits and bytes and suddenly they get lazy.
OOP has nothing to do with this. I can't think of an OOP language that does not allow you to handle bits and bytes.
[Java was] a C-a-like with OO
So is C++. Throughout your post you talk about how disorganized the class libraries are. If you ever code enterpreise-level software, or need to code something quickly, you will appreciate those libraries. Implementing everything yourself will result in bigger, slower code and longer development cycles.
I recommend learning C# since it has a very organized class library, and using that to dig into what OOP really is. I've even done OOP in assembly language - it's a design paradigm, with zero overhead, a few keywords, and some damn powerfully expressive shortcuts.
(Queue someone posting outdated information about virtuals to try and counter the "zero overhead" part)
Can you explain how C++ does not support parametric polymorphism in its entirety? From the Wikipedia article you quoted:
Today it exists in Standard ML, OCaml, Ada, Haskell, C++, Visual Prolog and others. Java, C#, Visual Basic .NET and Delphi (CodeGear) have each recently introduced "generics" for parametric polymorphism.
Based on the descriptions of how parametric polymorphism works, C++ seems to support it 100%. Are you sure you aren't meaning C#, which has "generics" instead of "templates?"
Most companies specifically forbid you from using office tools for such purpose. And any company I have ever worked for was very clear that any such use was subject to monitoring, which is completely reasonable and logical.
You are way off if you think you can come into a corporate office and make personal calls with any expectation of privacy.
i would assume if my job was ever terminated people wouldn't go through my browser's history and look at all the cookies generated unless it was directly related to my work.
That's a terrible assumption. You should assume the super-opposite: that not only would that do that upon your termination, but that someone is probably assigned to do this periodically for all employees. There may even be an automated tool taking note that I post on Slashdot right now.
Does Linux support TRIM?
The big news everyone seems to be missing is that everyone and their mom will be able to block ads with very little knowledge.
Huh? They can do that now by using one of the many ad blocking extensions. How does the fact that they can do it by writing 80 lines of code make it any easier on them? Sounds much more difficult to me!
Why are people treating this "white roads" thing like something new and exciting and dangerous. Here in the northeast US, interstate highways are white concrete anyway. I assume it is lower maintenance.
Almost as bad as the soda they put into the bottles in the first place!
This is the comment I was looking for. If only I had mod points. law ~= s/Car/Technology/g. Right to repair should apply to every product.
...which can be used directly to power a diesel engine".../quote>
Reading between the lines, I theorize that they really mean "which could possibly be used to directly power some form of theoretical diesel engine that does not yet exist, but could be built, although it may not be as clean or efficient."
I don't think they mean that an existing engine would work with it. Can't be sure though.
Actually, I disagree. The analogy is very good.
Cars do no spend the majority of their time idling at traffic lights. Computers (especially servers) however do often end up idling a very large percentage of the time.
Both statements are not universally true.
Taxis, for example, may spend the majority of their time idling. So do big-city rush-hour commuters. And many servers idle 90% of the time, while others idle 10% of the time.
You can't make blanket statements about cars idle time, or computers idle time, since it probably varies 10000:1 based on the usage.
You can legislate away a portion of impulse murder and accident by otherwise law abiding citizens
Agreed. I guess the fact that such laws don't impact crime significantly tells us that these are not a significant portion of murders. It might be that those very same law-abiding citizens are the ones most likely to use their guns to stop crimes, thus canceling out the effect of reduced impulse murders.
Also, if you don't believe that low availability of guns affects their price and availability to criminal elements... well anyway
I hold no such belief. You are probably right: It seems like it should make them more expensive. But that doesn't change the fact that these laws aren't doing anything to reduce gun-related crime.
Since I'm replying, lemme throw out some anecdotes. I live in the perfect gun crime statistic: Baltimore. We have:
- High non-gun-related crime
- High gun-related crime
- Poor schools
- Gun control laws
For 30 years, the Baltimore City Council has enacted various gun control laws to no effect. The worldwide statistics show that gun crime is 1) proportional to crime in general 2) inversely proportional to the quality of schools, 3) not proportional to gun control laws. That matches exactly with what happens here.
One day, legislators will realize that the problem is crime and education, not guns. I bet that if every gun in Baltimore was magically transformed into a knife, that the number of knife-related murders would increase by exactly the same amount as the reduction in gun-related murders.
Also, many orange juices have sugar added. And many of the "low sugar" ones just add sugar substitutes! As though it wasn't sweet enough.
I don't intend to defend the statement about Australia, but it would not be inconsistent with what statistics show about other nations.
The statistics that were quoted on Wikipedia are from a more detailed survey that also cataloged gun ownership and gun control laws across those same countries. In college, I read the entire thing, but I can't find it online anywhere. The results show that legal gun ownership is not proportional to non-suicide gun deaths. Interestingly, if you throw education into the mix, there is a very close correlation between education and non-suicide gun related deaths.
Really it makes sense: Criminals use guns to kill people, and gun laws do not affect criminal gun ownership. Hence, you can't legislate away murder.
I'm confused.
There are two implementations: OpenOffice and Microsoft Office. Microsoft Office does it differently from OpenOffice, and you conclude that "only Microsoft handles it very differently?" Or is there another reference implementation to compare to?