In many cases, the easier it is for the developers to work, the more functionality the end-user gets and the less bugs there are. I can see this doing nothing but helping the consumer. Of course, if they abstract things to far it could cause problems, but Sony knows what they're doing.
Unless you're trying to build a VB-like system, XML would not be practical at all.
I tried designing an XML-based programming language long ago and failed miserably. It just doesn't work out well. I do think that languages are ready for a revolution, though. I love C syntax, but it's stale and there are many things we can improve upon.
Rosegarden looks absolutely fantastic. Unfortunately, its dependancy on KDElibs and QT make it impractical for me to build it in a reasonable amount of time (I'm on gentoo, so binaries for everything isn't really an option) and its layout makes it impossible for me to use it in ratpoison (my WM of choice) anyway.
Looks nice, but definitely could use some work in the dependancy and UI area.
Thank you sir.
If it weren't for non-readers like yourselves (or "non-gays" from your post) we wouldn't have people to pump our gas, wash our windows, and do other trivial but neccesary jobs.
I salute you.
I am a junior at the Chambersburg Area Senior High School in Chambersburg, PA, USA, and I'm an experienced C/C++/PHP/Python/ASM developer. I see programming competitions all over the web, but I've never seen good challenges. Especially when it comes to competitions geared more to highschoolers, a challenge is important. A good challenge will keep the interest of any developer with significant interest in completing it.
I've been trying to pool ideas and sponsors for a Python development competition (information is available here if you're interested) but have been coming up short. I've participated in PHP coding competitions in the past, but the main gripes I have with them is that the challenges are either easy or extremely boring, either of which makes it extremely difficult to stay focused on.
One idea I've been throwing around is setting up a site for open bounties, where someone puts up the money for a challenge and whoever completes it gets the money. If this sort of a system caught on, it could be great for developers of all ages, as well as providing a lot of different challenges for people with different interests, something that's quite difficult to do in a traditional competition setting.
Hopefully this will give you some insight into what highschoolers want, even though I'm far from a typical highschooler when it comes to interests:)
A decent IDE, relatively good language support (Pascal, now C#, and many others), and a whole lot of other features make it a great environment for RAD. That said, I have barely used it, just going on what I've heard from friends that are HUGE Delphi fans:)
"Virus are not protected by copyright, patents etc." _ALL_ software is protected by copyright unless the author(s) explicitly release copyright. Just because the authors don't want to be known doesn't mean they give up their rights.
"Reverse engineering is when you disassemble and recreate a the original source" Reverse-engineering is the process of figuring out the processes and algorithms used in a piece of software/hardware. Creating the source (no matter how close it is to the original) is done either by means of decompiling (taking the machine-code or ASM of the application and converting it to a high-level language like C. not really practical for most things yet, especially virii) or engineering (taking the information you got and writing the code primarily by hand)
"Then, the hard part is to create a set of specifications without referring to the original code or snippets, then handing that over the "wall" to someone who has not been exposed to any of the IP of the original and rewriting the code from scratch" Most of what I do is reverse-engineering, and I can tell you from experience that this is _not_ neccesary, and I'd be willing to contact my IP lawyers for further confirmation on this (my company has been working on a decompiler for a while now, and the legalities are a large concern for us). There are many things (even the DMCA assists in this respect) that help protect reverse-engineers.
Hope this helps clear up some of the confusion brought on by the parent post.
"Spam is not legitimate advertising. All you have to do to realize this is compare spam with other advertising. Normal advertising makes it very clear that it is, in fact, advertising, it clearly indicates the product being advertised, and it clearly indicates the organization doing the advertising."
So is (Pepsi, Coca-Cola, Microsoft, Nike, $NAME_OF_LARGE_CORPORATION)'s product placement legitimate advertising? I know, personally, that I _hate_ seeing product placement on near every TV show out there, but should we make this illegal as well?
There are sooo many better ways than brute-force cracking to figure out keys. The NSA specializes in finding these methods, not throwing hardware at the problem like many people do. If they want to crack a key, they'll do so.
> Day 1: Throwing money at technology. - I have no problem with this. Most of us in some way work in the IT field and this means more money and jobs.
This is much like the phrase "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." in that it's simply not using the right tool for the job. When you simply through money at a problem it doesn't go away; it's masked. Rather than fixing the problem at the source, you obfuscate it and make it seem like it isn't there. Although this works in the short term, it really isn't a good long term strategy.
> Day 2: Companies profiting from fear. - It's usually the stinkin' rich guys fearing for their luxury sports cars. This means they enlist security companies to safeguard themselves. More money for the little guys.
This is not true at all. A good example is the companies selling gasmasks. Between the FUD put forth by the US government about "potential terrorist attacks" (including the warning system in place now) and the media pushing everyone to buy gas masks, a lot of the "little guys" got muscled into buying something they not only didn't _need_, but couldn't easily afford.
> Day 3: Global assault on anonymity. - This one I have a problem with. I'm a little worried about private companies tracking our movements and stalking us for our money. We have a choice not to deal with that company and take our money elsewhere. But when the government does it, there is no escape. It's either let them do it or flee the country (not a very easy task for some).
We don't always have the choice of not dealing with a company. There are many companies that have such a monopoly on a given field that we can't do without them.
And when the government does it (or even attempts to), we all should be writing letters to our senators, our representatives, and the president. There are no guarantees, but the more people that do it, the better chance of it getting overturned.
I'm just going to throw my opinion in here.
> Day 1: Throwing money at technology. - I have no problem with this. Most of us in some way work in the IT field and this means more money and jobs.
This is much like the phrase "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." in that it's simply not using the right tool for the job. When you simply through money at a problem it doesn't go away; it's masked. Rather than fixing the problem at the source, you obfuscate it and make it seem like it isn't there. Although this works in the short term, it really isn't a good long term strategy.
> Day 2: Companies profiting from fear. - It's usually the stinkin' rich guys fearing for their luxury sports cars. This means they enlist security companies to safeguard themselves. More money for the little guys.
This is not true at all. A good example is the companies selling gasmasks. Between the FUD put forth by the US government about "potential terrorist attacks" (including the warning system in place now) and the media pushing everyone to buy gas masks, a lot of the "little guys" got muscled into buying something they not only didn't _need_, but couldn't easily afford.
> Day 3: Global assault on anonymity. - This one I have a problem with. I'm a little worried about private companies tracking our movements and stalking us for our money. We have a choice not to deal with that company and take our money elsewhere. But when the government does it, there is no escape. It's either let them do it or flee the country (not a very easy task for some).
We don't always have the choice of not dealing with a company. There are many companies that have such a monopoly on a given field that we can't do without them.
And when the government does it (or even attempts to), we all should be writing letters to our senators, our representatives, and the president. There are no guarantees, but the more people that do it, the better chance of it getting overturned.
When will we be dropping HTTP and HTML in favor of more metadata-friendly protocols and file formats? I can see huge potential in a system built specifically for getting data out there and linking it all together.
Slashdot Mirror
In many cases, the easier it is for the developers to work, the more functionality the end-user gets and the less bugs there are. I can see this doing nothing but helping the consumer. Of course, if they abstract things to far it could cause problems, but Sony knows what they're doing.
"However I see no reason to NOT port OS-X to the Intel platform." Money. Simple as that.
So you're saying that I can print a new liver? Sweet! *breaks out a 6-pack*
Possible? sure. Practical? No.
Unless you're trying to build a VB-like system, XML would not be practical at all.
I tried designing an XML-based programming language long ago and failed miserably. It just doesn't work out well. I do think that languages are ready for a revolution, though. I love C syntax, but it's stale and there are many things we can improve upon.
No, it will not be.
They don't have to put it in hardware as long as they close the source for their software. DRM can be done on Linux, just not in opensource software.
It's because FIRST is for young people.
One thing that they don't seem to be addressing is that _everyone_ is biased in some way or another on some topic. They seem to forget this.
That said, wikinews looks damn cool, and I look forward to reading it and/or contributing to it.
1984? Is that a movie or something?
(Please don't harm my karma for that... you called one of the greatest books ever obscure... how could a geek resist?)
That's one big pusher robot!
Or is it a shover?
Rosegarden looks absolutely fantastic. Unfortunately, its dependancy on KDElibs and QT make it impractical for me to build it in a reasonable amount of time (I'm on gentoo, so binaries for everything isn't really an option) and its layout makes it impossible for me to use it in ratpoison (my WM of choice) anyway.
Looks nice, but definitely could use some work in the dependancy and UI area.
Thank you sir. If it weren't for non-readers like yourselves (or "non-gays" from your post) we wouldn't have people to pump our gas, wash our windows, and do other trivial but neccesary jobs. I salute you.
I've been wondering the same for a long while now. I stopped using Mozilla about 3 months ago when Firefox for Linux bypassed Mozilla for speed.
I am a junior at the Chambersburg Area Senior High School in Chambersburg, PA, USA, and I'm an experienced C/C++/PHP/Python/ASM developer. I see programming competitions all over the web, but I've never seen good challenges. Especially when it comes to competitions geared more to highschoolers, a challenge is important. A good challenge will keep the interest of any developer with significant interest in completing it.
:)
I've been trying to pool ideas and sponsors for a Python development competition (information is available here if you're interested) but have been coming up short. I've participated in PHP coding competitions in the past, but the main gripes I have with them is that the challenges are either easy or extremely boring, either of which makes it extremely difficult to stay focused on.
One idea I've been throwing around is setting up a site for open bounties, where someone puts up the money for a challenge and whoever completes it gets the money. If this sort of a system caught on, it could be great for developers of all ages, as well as providing a lot of different challenges for people with different interests, something that's quite difficult to do in a traditional competition setting.
Hopefully this will give you some insight into what highschoolers want, even though I'm far from a typical highschooler when it comes to interests
A decent IDE, relatively good language support (Pascal, now C#, and many others), and a whole lot of other features make it a great environment for RAD. That said, I have barely used it, just going on what I've heard from friends that are HUGE Delphi fans :)
from Clearneon?
Is it just that clearneon sprays on and this has to be applied by the applicator?
My question is very simple: What tools do you use (both physical and digital) to create your comics?
:)
I'm a long-time reader and have always wondered
This is wrong on oh-so-many levels.
"Virus are not protected by copyright, patents etc."
_ALL_ software is protected by copyright unless the author(s) explicitly release copyright. Just because the authors don't want to be known doesn't mean they give up their rights.
"Reverse engineering is when you disassemble and recreate a the original source"
Reverse-engineering is the process of figuring out the processes and algorithms used in a piece of software/hardware. Creating the source (no matter how close it is to the original) is done either by means of decompiling (taking the machine-code or ASM of the application and converting it to a high-level language like C. not really practical for most things yet, especially virii) or engineering (taking the information you got and writing the code primarily by hand)
"Then, the hard part is to create a set of specifications without referring to the original code or snippets, then handing that over the "wall" to someone who has not been exposed to any of the IP of the original and rewriting the code from scratch"
Most of what I do is reverse-engineering, and I can tell you from experience that this is _not_ neccesary, and I'd be willing to contact my IP lawyers for further confirmation on this (my company has been working on a decompiler for a while now, and the legalities are a large concern for us). There are many things (even the DMCA assists in this respect) that help protect reverse-engineers.
Hope this helps clear up some of the confusion brought on by the parent post.
"Spam is not legitimate advertising. All you have to do to realize this is compare spam with other advertising. Normal advertising makes it very clear that it is, in fact, advertising, it clearly indicates the product being advertised, and it clearly indicates the organization doing the advertising."
So is (Pepsi, Coca-Cola, Microsoft, Nike, $NAME_OF_LARGE_CORPORATION)'s product placement legitimate advertising? I know, personally, that I _hate_ seeing product placement on near every TV show out there, but should we make this illegal as well?
There are sooo many better ways than brute-force cracking to figure out keys. The NSA specializes in finding these methods, not throwing hardware at the problem like many people do. If they want to crack a key, they'll do so.
I'm just going to throw my opinion in here.
> Day 1: Throwing money at technology. - I have no problem with this. Most of us in some way work in the IT field and this means more money and jobs.
This is much like the phrase "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." in that it's simply not using the right tool for the job. When you simply through money at a problem it doesn't go away; it's masked. Rather than fixing the problem at the source, you obfuscate it and make it seem like it isn't there. Although this works in the short term, it really isn't a good long term strategy.
> Day 2: Companies profiting from fear. - It's usually the stinkin' rich guys fearing for their luxury sports cars. This means they enlist security companies to safeguard themselves. More money for the little guys.
This is not true at all. A good example is the companies selling gasmasks. Between the FUD put forth by the US government about "potential terrorist attacks" (including the warning system in place now) and the media pushing everyone to buy gas masks, a lot of the "little guys" got muscled into buying something they not only didn't _need_, but couldn't easily afford.
> Day 3: Global assault on anonymity. - This one I have a problem with. I'm a little worried about private companies tracking our movements and stalking us for our money. We have a choice not to deal with that company and take our money elsewhere. But when the government does it, there is no escape. It's either let them do it or flee the country (not a very easy task for some).
We don't always have the choice of not dealing with a company. There are many companies that have such a monopoly on a given field that we can't do without them.
And when the government does it (or even attempts to), we all should be writing letters to our senators, our representatives, and the president. There are no guarantees, but the more people that do it, the better chance of it getting overturned.
I'm just going to throw my opinion in here. > Day 1: Throwing money at technology. - I have no problem with this. Most of us in some way work in the IT field and this means more money and jobs. This is much like the phrase "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." in that it's simply not using the right tool for the job. When you simply through money at a problem it doesn't go away; it's masked. Rather than fixing the problem at the source, you obfuscate it and make it seem like it isn't there. Although this works in the short term, it really isn't a good long term strategy. > Day 2: Companies profiting from fear. - It's usually the stinkin' rich guys fearing for their luxury sports cars. This means they enlist security companies to safeguard themselves. More money for the little guys. This is not true at all. A good example is the companies selling gasmasks. Between the FUD put forth by the US government about "potential terrorist attacks" (including the warning system in place now) and the media pushing everyone to buy gas masks, a lot of the "little guys" got muscled into buying something they not only didn't _need_, but couldn't easily afford. > Day 3: Global assault on anonymity. - This one I have a problem with. I'm a little worried about private companies tracking our movements and stalking us for our money. We have a choice not to deal with that company and take our money elsewhere. But when the government does it, there is no escape. It's either let them do it or flee the country (not a very easy task for some). We don't always have the choice of not dealing with a company. There are many companies that have such a monopoly on a given field that we can't do without them. And when the government does it (or even attempts to), we all should be writing letters to our senators, our representatives, and the president. There are no guarantees, but the more people that do it, the better chance of it getting overturned.
That this should be illegal. Unfortunately, the way the legal system in the US is, it'd just make things worse and not fix the problem.
When will we be dropping HTTP and HTML in favor of more metadata-friendly protocols and file formats? I can see huge potential in a system built specifically for getting data out there and linking it all together.
You, sir, are a moron. They didn't invent a new mechanism for transmitting a signal. Electrons _have_ to be used.
How fast could this ever be? Neat, but I dunno how this could ever be put to a practical use. Cool hack none the less.