Ok, I think I understand your post. BUT, what I don't get is how macros get LISPers all excited about macros when macros look so much like regular function calls.
For example, if PSILISP were just a bunch of functions in Java, we could write code that would do essentially the same thing with the same number of lines of code. Furthermore it COULD (though it often isn't I admit) be just as readable as the LISP version. No?
Really, I'm not trying to be difficult. I'm just missing the magic here. I'm sure that part of what I'm missing is context. If this were the 1970's and I were faced with decision to choose the most productive environment and I got to decide between something like BAL, COBOL, FORTRAN, or LISP; I'm sure I would choose LISP. In the context of that day and age, LISP and macros WOULD be magic. And, I'm not saying LISP is no longer useful, it just has a much more mature heritage and I'm sure that its younger cousins probably stole much from it.
BTW - If you would like to see a web development framework that provides a full object oriented treatment of web development semantics, give Tapestry a look. Granted, it's a Java framework, but you may find some inspiration for features there. In particular, you might like to see the components that Tapestry provides a developer. It is, by far, the best UI layer framework for web development I have found in the Java world. I compare its productivity to the ASP.NET framework, which I have also used for work (say what you like about.NET; it's productive as all hell).
I think you could take this idea in at least two different directions:
1. Language style/internationalization mapping - Allow programmers to be productive using familiar symbols, keywords and in their native language. This could allow you to use an internationalized keyword as part of the language instead of a fixed English word ('si' instead of 'if' in Spanish for instance). This could also allow stylistic mappings like 'End If' or 'fi' instead of '}'. Essentially this would automate the same sorts of transformations that one could accomplish with C style macro expansion, and it wouldn't require you to use a language that had a macro processing feature; it would require it of the IDE though.
2. Language semantic mapping - This one is harder. So, OK, it's easy to say that if I used 'if' in one language it will be 'if' in the next language. Comment characters/blocks wouldn't be too bad either, for the most part. But what about operator precedence? What about incongruent semantic mappings in general? (For example, the tuple return feature in Python mapped onto Java.) Granted, all those transformations will be possible, but the generated code would, in many cases, be awkward and not really in line with how an experienced practitioner in the target language would do things. One thing you have to keep in mind is that programming languages are separate languages for a reason. Each language brings a different way of seeing information systems to the table. The C view of systems bears some similarity to the Java view of systems but it really is vastly different in how it solves problems.
I really see the former case as being the most useful. In particular, I see the internationalization case as being the noblest use of this idea. But, ultimately, I think your idea could really benefit one language at a time. So, one could do something like this for C. Just use C's standard syntax as the baseline tokens and then do the stylistic/internationalization transformations right in memory in the editor. That way, everyone else can still use the source code, and only the developer with the custom IDE has the transformed code. Likewise, having accomplished that, it would be pretty easy to do for Python, etc. One thing it probably would not be able to do though, would be name transformations for the relevant library APIs. Those translations could be pre-mapped to the list of known APIs, but some of those translations would have to be done on the fly. I guarantee that would confuse a lot of programmers as the selected term may not accurately reflect a translation of a word in the API name. Actually, it's a fairly funny thought.
.NET byte code does NOT typically contain the source code within it. So, what you have is the raw IL which resembles so much assembler. On top of that, IL can be obfuscated to remove any meaningful identifiers. IF the IL does contain the source code, it's only because the IL was compiled for usage in a debug environment. And then, the IL will be the source language of the developer of the program, not the source language of your choice.
Granted, a reverse engineering from IL to language source is possible, but it's never perfect and almost always messy.
So, in short, IL != source code.
Same thing applies to Java byte code, BTW.
Feel free to prove me wrong. I'd be happy to use your product.;+)
Macros can completely transform the source, at compile time, but with the full power of the language. Having that ability, together with simplicity, means that it's easy to build a complete mini-language for one's manager or web designer to use on the site, and easy for them to learn it, since you can explain the syntax in 5 minutes or less, and they don't have to learn 50 built-ins to use it.
Could you give an example of this? Every person who's ever made a living doing LISP raves about LISP in this way. I've never seen the magic here or had the necessary ah-ha moment. I've seen some really really ugly code in LISP that looks like it took about 4x longer to write than it would in VB or Java though; so it is off-putting that way.
they undoubtedly make a lot of money for the likes of Best Buy. It's probably a cash cow for them. That said, I've purchased a product warranty a grand total of once from them. And guess what? I needed to use it. I bought a laptop from them and about 2 months before the extended warranty ran out, the battery on the laptop wouldn't hold a charge.
So, I brought the laptop in, talked to a tech there who agreed with my diagnosis. He issued me a RMA style authorization receipt and sent me on my way. I used the contact info on the receipt and BAM!, about a week and half later I had a working battery for my laptop. I suspect that it was a refurb, but I didn't really care about that.
So, some people might get screwed. The warranties don't always make sense (hell, they're not going to stop you from buying one if your chances of ever needing it are practically nil). So FWIW, my experience was good. Maybe I'm just an anomaly, maybe not.
I think that most of the quality and satisfaction issues concerning warranty and product servicing are going to be around the more complex cases. My case was simple.
their existing "shared source" license (which is, I believe, derived from the BSD license) and it would most likely exclude some integral pieces, like the actual kernel. I'm just guessing of course. Also, MUCH would change if they did go the OSS route for a lot of their software. Assuming they took on more of a benevolent dictator role, we could at least submit patches for security issues and audit their code for more issues.
Actually, if they were very careful about how they do this, they could obviate a lot of claims about their lack of openness, keep their monopoly level of market share, gain a huge body of people who would inspect their code (for the sheer curiosity if nothing else), and make a big public relations killing.
After all, if Linux is quickly becoming free speech only (and less and less about free beer) and Windows/Office is almost as open as any Linux product, what would Linux really have going for it anymore? Linux's openness is quickly becoming its only distinctive feature. Linux evangelists worldwide had better hope Windows never goes OSS. It wouldn't kill Linux, but it sure would make a lot of conversions over to Linux unecessary. The only institutuions that would convert to Linux after an opening of Windows/Office would be non-profits and government agencies who simply can't afford any licensing costs anymore and have got to have a free beer OS. All the rest wouldn't have to just trust Microsoft anymore, would have those privacy/security issues addressed, and would happily stay put with the MS suite.
I wouldn't call the parent to your post particularly well worded, but I think his point was that it isn't necessarily easy to get all the features you want in Eclipse to work. I know, I've been there too. In fact, I'm no longer there. I'm using JBuilder now. Is JBuilder more powerful than Eclipse? Probably not; it may even be less powerful over the long haul. But it gets the job done without fuss. It doesn't get in my way. It doesn't require me to download 99 add-ons and configure each one. Etc. etc...
I also have used VS.NET, and I can tell you that folks from that camp have some very high standards for what makes a good IDE. We (or at least, I) are/am not patient with "application development frameworks" that masquerade as IDEs. If Eclipse isn't first and foremost an IDE (which is also extensible), its usability will suffer.
Having said all that, I would love to get an in your face response of "hell download these two files and install and you'll have the Java IDE to end all Java IDEs with Tomcat support, JSP debugging, UML, CVS, code completion, code standards auditing, code optimization, blah blah blah support". I would love that. I would love to be wrong because I would love to be able to run all the way to the bank with such a product.
Go on then... let's see it.
Oh, and I am downloading Eclipse 3.0 RC3 just to take a look-see. What else do I need?
You've put very little substance into your claim. How is he "bigoted"? It's not like he's always saying "Microsoft rulez, *nix users suck". His experiences at Microsoft undoubtedly taught him a lot, and why shouldn't he leverage that experience?
You seem like a smart person who would otherwise be worth listening to. Why not go inform yourself about Joel before spouting stuff like this? If you're going to oppose his position on various issues, then at least do it intelligently. This may be/. but you don't HAVE to become part of the rabble.
It was?! Well, thank the deities that no one HAS posted a story about it. Now we stand a chance of getting a hold of it. Hell, they probably aren't posting the story yet either so THEY can get it first.;+)
I agree with you. And here's some relevant ramblings.
I don't know if you've actually tried Yahoo's Plus service, but I have it and it rocks. Besides the 2GB storage space, I *DO* have POP access to my Yahoo mail account. Couple that with Yahoo's near perfect spam filtering (I see maybe 2 or 3 spam a day out of about 500 I receive every day), and it's really a helluva service.
Besides email Yahoo also gives me a personal home page that is VERY configurable, a nice address book with import/export capabilities, a personal calendar, a personal file area (briefcase), etc. Does Google provide all that? I doubt it. On top of that, they would have to provide a better version of all that in order for people like me to care.
There currently ARE some response time issues with Yahoo mail, but those may be related to the Akamai issues noted on today's/. front page. Either way, once those issues are cleared up, I'll have an email account that I wouldn't trade for a free gMail account. Yahoo has been in this game much longer and they know what they're doing. I've never lost data with them. My understanding of Google's idea of "redundancy" is to throw 100 cheap PCs at the problem and hope nothing gets lost. I love their search engine, but that's not exactly an awe inspiring model for retaining personal data.
We'll see how it all pans out. But for now, Yahoo gets actual money from me and Google does not.
Just out of curiosity, as I'm currently an ignorant non-felon, how does having a felony on your record prevent you from starting a business making beer? Is it just preventing you from obtaining a license for offsale, or are you unable to start any business at all?
The little people in the world, who lead pointless, empty, meaningless lives.
Just in case you come back to read this AC troll, I think your quote above actually applies to you. Having a humble job doesn't mean the person with that job is pathetic. It doesn't even follow that it's probable.
On the other hand, if you're in a good job, with nice things, and are relatively successful and you feel the need to put down such people, then you are truly the pathetic person worthy of much pity.
if you actually want the material before hell freezes over. Our solution is TiVo. Yup, I'm a bit of a fanboy on this one. Try it, you'll like it.
FYI - You can tell TiVo to catch only first run episodes in a series. It actually works. It won't make new episodes come out any faster, but at least you won't get all the crap.
Also - There are about 10 Stargate episodes aired per week, and they are at least 90% re-runs. We have TiVo get them all (minus dupes - another TiVo feature).
Oh, and if you do get a TiVo, be sure to look up the 30 second skip button easter egg/hack. TiVo doesn't eliminate ads, but you can skip them easily with 6 or so presses of the 30 second skip button.
you may want to investigate doing a richer web application using newer UI level toolsets. My favorite at this point is for Java and it's called Tapestry. Therein, you will find a much richer than usual web development framework. Another one that Sun is working on is called Java Server Faces, though they're not really done with it yet and the current consensus among Tapestry folks is that, while it may be better than plain old JSP, that it's not better than Tapestry yet; but they're not biased either.;+)
The point here is that you *can* remain in a fat/rich client environment, but if you would like to finally make the transition to a web application, it's easier than ever now. We're well past the point where everyone is writing Perl CGI scripts or Java servlets that generate all of their own raw HTML (*shudder*).
I'm somewhat ignorant on this whole issue, but why don't the TTY service centers only accept calls from certain area codes and be done with it? There's no reason why they should have to service calls from outside their service area (which I'm assuming is regional to AZ), much less outside the country.
I'm no international trade expert, but I'm guessing that you have the British government to blame for that (because of tariffs) along with shipping costs. No?
It is, sort of. My reading of the article has lead me to believe that the XNA kit will allow a game to be developed once, and run on the XBOX, XBOX-2, or PC platforms. If that's true, then XNA is a bit more than a re-marketing of the DirectX family of technologies. It would also include all the DRM necessary for a XNA compliant game, cross-compilation for the XBOX-2 deployments, a new hardware abstraction layer that can deal with the XBOX-2 hardware (assuming it's not written already), etc. etc. etc.
It's probably a good thing for gamers because now I'm guessing we'll see more simultaneous releases for the PC, XBOX, and XBOX-2. Another thought, it may allow gamers to upgrade to an XBOX-2 without leaving behind their existing investment in XBOX games (though there has been speculation about Virtual PC filling those shoes already - heck, maybe that will become part of XNA?).
This is a very "Microsoft-ish" kind of move. They truly are masters of the product integration game and it's the one thing they innovate at better than anyone else. If they do this right, I think they're going to please game developers tremendously.
Make sure you stay (or become) a well rounded person. If you geek out all day for work, then go home and do that some more for fun, you'll burn out. And, you won't be as productive. And, you'll be bitter at some point. And, ultimately, someone will get tired of your bitter, humorless attitude, and throw you out on your rear-end. Then, life will suck..
Oh, and here's another big tip: Do NOT, EVER spend beyond your means. Make sure that your regular expenditures do not expand right along with your income. At some point, you'll have enough. Why spend the difference? Just save it, invest it, etc. But don't just waste it.
Why is the money angle important? Well, in the long term, it gives you options. If you decide you want to transition out of a well paying but soul destroying job, it will save you. On the other hand, if you HAVE to keep that job, then you're trapped. And, you'll FEEL trapped. And, you'll start ACTING trapped. Then, you'll be no fun to be around, and everyone will want your ass gone.
Just have some balance, that's all.
Re:I don't know. Does time even exist?
on
Everything and More
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I have to protest the idea that I'm saying that time doesn't exist because I'm simply ignorant about it. I'm saying that no one, AFAIK, has bothered to look into whether it has any physical reality whatsoever. Yes, it's a useful abstraction. My problem with this abstraction though is that people continually treat like it's something real in the physical sense. My hand is real. This desk is real. Position within space is real. Change of position in space is real. Change of position in space measured relative to the change in position for the hands of a clock is real. But to say that "time" exists in a physical sense because we can say those things is a stretch.
Think about it this way: If the physical reality of time isn't real and is nothing more than a useful mathematical abstraction (as is infinity by the way), then how would time travel be possible? Wouldn't traveling through some sort of space be predicated upon finding that space first?!
Where time is concerned, we say to ourselves "well it must exist, because there has been a change in the time on the clock". But the clock only changes because we made it that way. The clock doesn't actually measure anything after all, it's just a contraption who's parts move around in a predetermined way. AFAIK, all of physics is based around such clocks. But, again, these clocks don't measure anything physical. Yet, the verity of time as a physical property is assumed.
You think time physically exists? Give me a thought experiment that would appear to prove its existence. Keep in mind that I say that all anyone proves by pointing to a clock of any kind, is that there's some matter and, "Oh look! It moves around". At this point in time, I can not conceive of a proof for the existence of time which somehow doesn't rely upon an external, irrelevant event.
Honestly, I'm not trolling here. Review my posting history and you'll see I'm not a troll. I am pointing out the arbitrariness of human perception though.
I'm no mathematician, but I've often wondered what math/physics today would be like if physicists refused to use concepts like infinity and even time in equations. After all, AFAIK, we haven't proven either of them exists and there is very little science to suggest that they do. You should be able to use physical concepts like time and infinity in equations until you at least have a solid scientific basis for positing their existence.
I'm guessing that stripping away those constants and redeveloping modern mathematics and then physics without fictitious concepts like infinity and time would force a shift in perspective that would have far reaching implications.
Am I off my rocker, or does this make sense to anyone in the know?
Slashdot Mirror
That was just too damn funny. I'd mod you up, but I'm fresh out.
Ok, I think I understand your post. BUT, what I don't get is how macros get LISPers all excited about macros when macros look so much like regular function calls.
.NET; it's productive as all hell).
For example, if PSILISP were just a bunch of functions in Java, we could write code that would do essentially the same thing with the same number of lines of code. Furthermore it COULD (though it often isn't I admit) be just as readable as the LISP version. No?
Really, I'm not trying to be difficult. I'm just missing the magic here. I'm sure that part of what I'm missing is context. If this were the 1970's and I were faced with decision to choose the most productive environment and I got to decide between something like BAL, COBOL, FORTRAN, or LISP; I'm sure I would choose LISP. In the context of that day and age, LISP and macros WOULD be magic. And, I'm not saying LISP is no longer useful, it just has a much more mature heritage and I'm sure that its younger cousins probably stole much from it.
BTW - If you would like to see a web development framework that provides a full object oriented treatment of web development semantics, give Tapestry a look. Granted, it's a Java framework, but you may find some inspiration for features there. In particular, you might like to see the components that Tapestry provides a developer. It is, by far, the best UI layer framework for web development I have found in the Java world. I compare its productivity to the ASP.NET framework, which I have also used for work (say what you like about
I think you could take this idea in at least two different directions:
;+)
1. Language style/internationalization mapping - Allow programmers to be productive using familiar symbols, keywords and in their native language. This could allow you to use an internationalized keyword as part of the language instead of a fixed English word ('si' instead of 'if' in Spanish for instance). This could also allow stylistic mappings like 'End If' or 'fi' instead of '}'. Essentially this would automate the same sorts of transformations that one could accomplish with C style macro expansion, and it wouldn't require you to use a language that had a macro processing feature; it would require it of the IDE though.
2. Language semantic mapping - This one is harder. So, OK, it's easy to say that if I used 'if' in one language it will be 'if' in the next language. Comment characters/blocks wouldn't be too bad either, for the most part. But what about operator precedence? What about incongruent semantic mappings in general? (For example, the tuple return feature in Python mapped onto Java.) Granted, all those transformations will be possible, but the generated code would, in many cases, be awkward and not really in line with how an experienced practitioner in the target language would do things. One thing you have to keep in mind is that programming languages are separate languages for a reason. Each language brings a different way of seeing information systems to the table. The C view of systems bears some similarity to the Java view of systems but it really is vastly different in how it solves problems.
I really see the former case as being the most useful. In particular, I see the internationalization case as being the noblest use of this idea. But, ultimately, I think your idea could really benefit one language at a time. So, one could do something like this for C. Just use C's standard syntax as the baseline tokens and then do the stylistic/internationalization transformations right in memory in the editor. That way, everyone else can still use the source code, and only the developer with the custom IDE has the transformed code. Likewise, having accomplished that, it would be pretty easy to do for Python, etc. One thing it probably would not be able to do though, would be name transformations for the relevant library APIs. Those translations could be pre-mapped to the list of known APIs, but some of those translations would have to be done on the fly. I guarantee that would confuse a lot of programmers as the selected term may not accurately reflect a translation of a word in the API name. Actually, it's a fairly funny thought.
Make it so!
.NET byte code does NOT typically contain the source code within it. So, what you have is the raw IL which resembles so much assembler. On top of that, IL can be obfuscated to remove any meaningful identifiers. IF the IL does contain the source code, it's only because the IL was compiled for usage in a debug environment. And then, the IL will be the source language of the developer of the program, not the source language of your choice.
;+)
Granted, a reverse engineering from IL to language source is possible, but it's never perfect and almost always messy.
So, in short, IL != source code.
Same thing applies to Java byte code, BTW.
Feel free to prove me wrong. I'd be happy to use your product.
Macros can completely transform the source, at compile time, but with the full power of the language. Having that ability, together with simplicity, means that it's easy to build a complete mini-language for one's manager or web designer to use on the site, and easy for them to learn it, since you can explain the syntax in 5 minutes or less, and they don't have to learn 50 built-ins to use it.
Could you give an example of this? Every person who's ever made a living doing LISP raves about LISP in this way. I've never seen the magic here or had the necessary ah-ha moment. I've seen some really really ugly code in LISP that looks like it took about 4x longer to write than it would in VB or Java though; so it is off-putting that way.
Thanks!
You just have to configure it properly. AND, it doesn't require a hack or mod. Just RTM.
It's a brain chemistry thing.
they undoubtedly make a lot of money for the likes of Best Buy. It's probably a cash cow for them. That said, I've purchased a product warranty a grand total of once from them. And guess what? I needed to use it. I bought a laptop from them and about 2 months before the extended warranty ran out, the battery on the laptop wouldn't hold a charge.
So, I brought the laptop in, talked to a tech there who agreed with my diagnosis. He issued me a RMA style authorization receipt and sent me on my way. I used the contact info on the receipt and BAM!, about a week and half later I had a working battery for my laptop. I suspect that it was a refurb, but I didn't really care about that.
So, some people might get screwed. The warranties don't always make sense (hell, they're not going to stop you from buying one if your chances of ever needing it are practically nil). So FWIW, my experience was good. Maybe I'm just an anomaly, maybe not.
I think that most of the quality and satisfaction issues concerning warranty and product servicing are going to be around the more complex cases. My case was simple.
Actually, if you look in the user info pages, you will see that a couple of the pages use the user id # as a URL parameter.
= 151940
0 000
For example:
http://slashdot.org/zoo.pl?op=check&uid
Change it to this:
http://slashdot.org/zoo.pl?op=check&uid=80
And you get an error message because that isn't a valid user. So my guess is that we haven't passed 800,000 yet.
their existing "shared source" license (which is, I believe, derived from the BSD license) and it would most likely exclude some integral pieces, like the actual kernel. I'm just guessing of course. Also, MUCH would change if they did go the OSS route for a lot of their software. Assuming they took on more of a benevolent dictator role, we could at least submit patches for security issues and audit their code for more issues.
Actually, if they were very careful about how they do this, they could obviate a lot of claims about their lack of openness, keep their monopoly level of market share, gain a huge body of people who would inspect their code (for the sheer curiosity if nothing else), and make a big public relations killing.
After all, if Linux is quickly becoming free speech only (and less and less about free beer) and Windows/Office is almost as open as any Linux product, what would Linux really have going for it anymore? Linux's openness is quickly becoming its only distinctive feature. Linux evangelists worldwide had better hope Windows never goes OSS. It wouldn't kill Linux, but it sure would make a lot of conversions over to Linux unecessary. The only institutuions that would convert to Linux after an opening of Windows/Office would be non-profits and government agencies who simply can't afford any licensing costs anymore and have got to have a free beer OS. All the rest wouldn't have to just trust Microsoft anymore, would have those privacy/security issues addressed, and would happily stay put with the MS suite.
I wouldn't call the parent to your post particularly well worded, but I think his point was that it isn't necessarily easy to get all the features you want in Eclipse to work. I know, I've been there too. In fact, I'm no longer there. I'm using JBuilder now. Is JBuilder more powerful than Eclipse? Probably not; it may even be less powerful over the long haul. But it gets the job done without fuss. It doesn't get in my way. It doesn't require me to download 99 add-ons and configure each one. Etc. etc...
I also have used VS.NET, and I can tell you that folks from that camp have some very high standards for what makes a good IDE. We (or at least, I) are/am not patient with "application development frameworks" that masquerade as IDEs. If Eclipse isn't first and foremost an IDE (which is also extensible), its usability will suffer.
Having said all that, I would love to get an in your face response of "hell download these two files and install and you'll have the Java IDE to end all Java IDEs with Tomcat support, JSP debugging, UML, CVS, code completion, code standards auditing, code optimization, blah blah blah support". I would love that. I would love to be wrong because I would love to be able to run all the way to the bank with such a product.
Go on then... let's see it.
Oh, and I am downloading Eclipse 3.0 RC3 just to take a look-see. What else do I need?
You've put very little substance into your claim. How is he "bigoted"? It's not like he's always saying "Microsoft rulez, *nix users suck". His experiences at Microsoft undoubtedly taught him a lot, and why shouldn't he leverage that experience?
/. but you don't HAVE to become part of the rabble.
You seem like a smart person who would otherwise be worth listening to. Why not go inform yourself about Joel before spouting stuff like this? If you're going to oppose his position on various issues, then at least do it intelligently. This may be
Because neither of them are programming languages.
THWAP!
BUT, Python was in there and since that's the foundational language for Zope, you SHOULD be happy.
Were you even serious?!
It was?! Well, thank the deities that no one HAS posted a story about it. Now we stand a chance of getting a hold of it. Hell, they probably aren't posting the story yet either so THEY can get it first. ;+)
Oh, and THANK YOU!
I agree with you. And here's some relevant ramblings.
/. front page. Either way, once those issues are cleared up, I'll have an email account that I wouldn't trade for a free gMail account. Yahoo has been in this game much longer and they know what they're doing. I've never lost data with them. My understanding of Google's idea of "redundancy" is to throw 100 cheap PCs at the problem and hope nothing gets lost. I love their search engine, but that's not exactly an awe inspiring model for retaining personal data.
I don't know if you've actually tried Yahoo's Plus service, but I have it and it rocks. Besides the 2GB storage space, I *DO* have POP access to my Yahoo mail account. Couple that with Yahoo's near perfect spam filtering (I see maybe 2 or 3 spam a day out of about 500 I receive every day), and it's really a helluva service.
Besides email Yahoo also gives me a personal home page that is VERY configurable, a nice address book with import/export capabilities, a personal calendar, a personal file area (briefcase), etc. Does Google provide all that? I doubt it. On top of that, they would have to provide a better version of all that in order for people like me to care.
There currently ARE some response time issues with Yahoo mail, but those may be related to the Akamai issues noted on today's
We'll see how it all pans out. But for now, Yahoo gets actual money from me and Google does not.
Just out of curiosity, as I'm currently an ignorant non-felon, how does having a felony on your record prevent you from starting a business making beer? Is it just preventing you from obtaining a license for offsale, or are you unable to start any business at all?
The little people in the world, who lead pointless, empty, meaningless lives.
Just in case you come back to read this AC troll, I think your quote above actually applies to you. Having a humble job doesn't mean the person with that job is pathetic. It doesn't even follow that it's probable.
On the other hand, if you're in a good job, with nice things, and are relatively successful and you feel the need to put down such people, then you are truly the pathetic person worthy of much pity.
Really, get a clue.
if you actually want the material before hell freezes over. Our solution is TiVo. Yup, I'm a bit of a fanboy on this one. Try it, you'll like it.
FYI - You can tell TiVo to catch only first run episodes in a series. It actually works. It won't make new episodes come out any faster, but at least you won't get all the crap.
Also - There are about 10 Stargate episodes aired per week, and they are at least 90% re-runs. We have TiVo get them all (minus dupes - another TiVo feature).
Oh, and if you do get a TiVo, be sure to look up the 30 second skip button easter egg/hack. TiVo doesn't eliminate ads, but you can skip them easily with 6 or so presses of the 30 second skip button.
you may want to investigate doing a richer web application using newer UI level toolsets. My favorite at this point is for Java and it's called Tapestry. Therein, you will find a much richer than usual web development framework. Another one that Sun is working on is called Java Server Faces, though they're not really done with it yet and the current consensus among Tapestry folks is that, while it may be better than plain old JSP, that it's not better than Tapestry yet; but they're not biased either. ;+)
The point here is that you *can* remain in a fat/rich client environment, but if you would like to finally make the transition to a web application, it's easier than ever now. We're well past the point where everyone is writing Perl CGI scripts or Java servlets that generate all of their own raw HTML (*shudder*).
I'm somewhat ignorant on this whole issue, but why don't the TTY service centers only accept calls from certain area codes and be done with it? There's no reason why they should have to service calls from outside their service area (which I'm assuming is regional to AZ), much less outside the country.
What am I missing here?
I'm no international trade expert, but I'm guessing that you have the British government to blame for that (because of tariffs) along with shipping costs. No?
It is, sort of. My reading of the article has lead me to believe that the XNA kit will allow a game to be developed once, and run on the XBOX, XBOX-2, or PC platforms. If that's true, then XNA is a bit more than a re-marketing of the DirectX family of technologies. It would also include all the DRM necessary for a XNA compliant game, cross-compilation for the XBOX-2 deployments, a new hardware abstraction layer that can deal with the XBOX-2 hardware (assuming it's not written already), etc. etc. etc.
It's probably a good thing for gamers because now I'm guessing we'll see more simultaneous releases for the PC, XBOX, and XBOX-2. Another thought, it may allow gamers to upgrade to an XBOX-2 without leaving behind their existing investment in XBOX games (though there has been speculation about Virtual PC filling those shoes already - heck, maybe that will become part of XNA?).
This is a very "Microsoft-ish" kind of move. They truly are masters of the product integration game and it's the one thing they innovate at better than anyone else. If they do this right, I think they're going to please game developers tremendously.
Make sure you stay (or become) a well rounded person. If you geek out all day for work, then go home and do that some more for fun, you'll burn out. And, you won't be as productive. And, you'll be bitter at some point. And, ultimately, someone will get tired of your bitter, humorless attitude, and throw you out on your rear-end. Then, life will suck..
Oh, and here's another big tip: Do NOT, EVER spend beyond your means. Make sure that your regular expenditures do not expand right along with your income. At some point, you'll have enough. Why spend the difference? Just save it, invest it, etc. But don't just waste it.
Why is the money angle important? Well, in the long term, it gives you options. If you decide you want to transition out of a well paying but soul destroying job, it will save you. On the other hand, if you HAVE to keep that job, then you're trapped. And, you'll FEEL trapped. And, you'll start ACTING trapped. Then, you'll be no fun to be around, and everyone will want your ass gone.
Just have some balance, that's all.
I have to protest the idea that I'm saying that time doesn't exist because I'm simply ignorant about it. I'm saying that no one, AFAIK, has bothered to look into whether it has any physical reality whatsoever. Yes, it's a useful abstraction. My problem with this abstraction though is that people continually treat like it's something real in the physical sense. My hand is real. This desk is real. Position within space is real. Change of position in space is real. Change of position in space measured relative to the change in position for the hands of a clock is real. But to say that "time" exists in a physical sense because we can say those things is a stretch.
Think about it this way: If the physical reality of time isn't real and is nothing more than a useful mathematical abstraction (as is infinity by the way), then how would time travel be possible? Wouldn't traveling through some sort of space be predicated upon finding that space first?!
Where time is concerned, we say to ourselves "well it must exist, because there has been a change in the time on the clock". But the clock only changes because we made it that way. The clock doesn't actually measure anything after all, it's just a contraption who's parts move around in a predetermined way. AFAIK, all of physics is based around such clocks. But, again, these clocks don't measure anything physical. Yet, the verity of time as a physical property is assumed.
You think time physically exists? Give me a thought experiment that would appear to prove its existence. Keep in mind that I say that all anyone proves by pointing to a clock of any kind, is that there's some matter and, "Oh look! It moves around". At this point in time, I can not conceive of a proof for the existence of time which somehow doesn't rely upon an external, irrelevant event.
Honestly, I'm not trolling here. Review my posting history and you'll see I'm not a troll. I am pointing out the arbitrariness of human perception though.
I'm no mathematician, but I've often wondered what math/physics today would be like if physicists refused to use concepts like infinity and even time in equations. After all, AFAIK, we haven't proven either of them exists and there is very little science to suggest that they do. You should be able to use physical concepts like time and infinity in equations until you at least have a solid scientific basis for positing their existence.
I'm guessing that stripping away those constants and redeveloping modern mathematics and then physics without fictitious concepts like infinity and time would force a shift in perspective that would have far reaching implications.
Am I off my rocker, or does this make sense to anyone in the know?