Established scientists use Word to write grant applications and edit papers their students have written.
That is true for most established scientists employed by universities. In the research facility where I work, the non-university backed scientists do their own analysis (and programming).
but not a single damned person that I know of using Ruby for science in our group
Actually I like Ruby, but I haven't used it much for linear algebra (I have compiled code for that). I've been looking at JBLAS (a JNI package in java that uses BLAS and LAPACK) and may incorporate it in some Ruby running on JRuby. However every time I have the free time to try, I go WTF? and go get a beer.;)
The 1970's called and they want their whitespace dependencies back. Everything is cyclical. Freeform languages become the rage after years of being shackled to languages based on punchcards where position is everything (e.g.. Fortran 77). Fast forward to today and we have people singing the praises of whitespace significance within Python.
Next thing you know, we'll be talking about the merits of running applications on a centralized machine and having the users accessing their applications with thin clients. Oh Wait....
Young Postdocs and graduate students may use Python. The established scientists use Perl, Fortran and IDL.
This is because scientists get paid to think about their field of specialty and not learning a new language. What language was popular during their education will most likely be the language they use in their careers.
You need the higher voltage supply to make up for voltage drop due to resistance found in the power cable themselves. The longer the cable the larger the resistance and the more pronounced the voltage drop. You could compensate by increasing amperage (to make up for lost power) and using heavier gauge cables (to reduce the internal resistance and handle the increased amperage), but the accepted practice is to distribute a higher voltage to the equipment and use a DC-DC converter in the device or immediately at its power input to deliver the required voltage. This is because it's generally safer and cheaper (material costs, weight) to distribute higher voltage than higher current.
This is why telcos use 48Vdc and the aircraft industry (MIL-STD-704F) use 24 Vdc.
I'm skeptical of Schmidt's personal account of how Google implemented Java. It's not like Google is going to admit anything but a "clean room implementation". I put Google in the exact same boat as Oracle. Oracle must prove Google didn't do a "clean room implementation" and Google must prove that they did.
Neither of these corporate entities are that credible in the first place.
Space lasers would be best, actually.
Here's the problem.
Nobody wants us to do that.
The reason nobody wants to do that is the fact that you'd go against the principles agreed to in the 5 space treaties that were agreed to by the UN's Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. If you were caught militarizing low earth orbit then you'd pretty much shit canned international cooperation that was painstakingly negotiated over since Sputnik I for a possibly unreliable not to mention hard to accurately implement at LEO speeds missile defense system.
This was a tragic event that should never be forgotten.
Yet April 19th came and went without a mention. On April 19, 1995, the Alfred P. Murrah Building was destroyed when 4 American terrorists exploded a cargo van full of explosives. 169 people died including 19 children under the age of 6 and over 680 people were injured.
People said we shouldn't forget the Oklahoma City bombing... yet we did...
Venture capitalists who wants the patents to remain secret as long as possible so they may have a chance to market the patent after their initial investment defaults.
I remember in the good o' days when companies rushed their products to market and marked certain parts of it "patent pending". Now days venture capitalists are using these patents as collateral betting that the inventor's lack of business experience will allow the portfolio to fall into the VC's hands. Afterwards the VC will be free to profit from selling or licensing the patent to others. It seems this new "requirement' to maintain secrecy for "competitive reasons" is really a ploy to give venture capitalist more time to market the patent to others.
You'd think the patent itself would be protection enough and that this need for secrecy goes against the reasoning behind patents to begin with...
Actually 'C' is the "top dog" whereas 'C++' is #3 behind Java.
C recently had its standard updated and the uptick could be a reflection of this. Not to mention the increased exposure that C is getting from objective-C.
Ruby is a hype machine, you can tell by the huge spikes and valleys when you see its popularity graphed out individually over the years.
Actually it's Ruby on Rails that was the hype machine. The spikes in the graph seem to correlate to with Rails popularity. Ruby the language enjoyed an upsurge in popularity from its association with Rails. Despite RoR no longer being the new kid on the block, ruby the language is holding its own.
Wrong, GPL is about protecting the rights of the end user. With the GPL the user of the compiled software always has access to the source code (since company internal modifications don't have to be re-distributed, one should consider a company as a whole as one user). With BSD the end user has no such guarantee.
The GPL does not specify that the source code shall be available in perpetuity. It only specifies that the source code shall be distributed (or made available) to the end user at time of distribution. The end user is not required to make the source code available.
BSD and GPL have the same access to the source code.
Thank you for your clarification. It's already been pointed out in a different thread.
As a courtesy, I've always sent my modifications back to the original author and after all these years I assumed it was also a requirement of the GPL (ie. I've always done it, but don't remember why or bother to refresh my memory). The GPL is not something I read everyday.
The GPL, though, is all about people who RECEIVE the code. It isn't about people who PROVIDE the code.
I disagree. BSD is really about the people who RECEIVE the code because they can do as they like with it. GPL is really about the people who PROVIDE the code because they want their work and any of its derivatives to be open sourced.
GPL really doesn't offer any more freedom than the other open source licenses since, like similar arguments for other forms of digital media, the derivative works take nothing away from the original source code. However the GPL encourages more open source development since I would not have contributed my time or effort on something that can be tweaked, repackaged and sold as a closed source product without any means of me seeing or incorporating the improvements being made.
Quite simply I chose the GPL license over the BSD license because of what it provided me not because I was concerned with the end user's freedoms. It's a matter of perspective.
It's not just about state tax money. There are other sources of income (research grants, patent licensing, tuition) for the university. Does the University of Florida gets an appropriate share of the UAA revenue considering how much revenue the UAA generates with its affiliation with UF? In 2011, the UAA made $96.5 million and gave an unrestricted "contribution" of $4.8 million which is around 5%. Should UF demand more?
Since you did mentioned tax money, I found some interesting information while reading the UAA budget and its associated audit. Chapter 1006 Section 71 of Florida Statues allows the UAA to retain all of the state sales tax collected for use in women's athletics. For the years ending June 30, 2011 and June 30, 2010, the amount retained was $1.48 million and $1.49 million respectively. You thought they were profiting on just the inflated price of concessions?
I'm sure if I really look hard enough, I can find more fungible state money floating around.
Slashdot Mirror
That is true for most established scientists employed by universities. In the research facility where I work, the non-university backed scientists do their own analysis (and programming).
Actually I like Ruby, but I haven't used it much for linear algebra (I have compiled code for that). I've been looking at JBLAS (a JNI package in java that uses BLAS and LAPACK) and may incorporate it in some Ruby running on JRuby. However every time I have the free time to try, I go WTF? and go get a beer. ;)
I feel your pain. Couple IDL with Perl code written as obscure as possible by someone who left 5 years ago then you have my work environment.
IDL does such a poor job on FITS files that I must clean up the output with a Perl script.
Luckily my other projects use different languages.
The 1970's called and they want their whitespace dependencies back. Everything is cyclical. Freeform languages become the rage after years of being shackled to languages based on punchcards where position is everything (e.g.. Fortran 77). Fast forward to today and we have people singing the praises of whitespace significance within Python.
Next thing you know, we'll be talking about the merits of running applications on a centralized machine and having the users accessing their applications with thin clients. Oh Wait....
Python and Ruby both are for Perl programmers who haven't lost their sanity yet.
Young Postdocs and graduate students may use Python. The established scientists use Perl, Fortran and IDL.
This is because scientists get paid to think about their field of specialty and not learning a new language. What language was popular during their education will most likely be the language they use in their careers.
Actually IDL is big with the scientists where I work and Mathlab is big with engineers. Fortran still has the most dominate position.
Actually I was thinking of work related injuries involving tools and trying to be humorous.
Touching the 12Vdc @ 500A copper bar bus will kill off some of the new guard too.
You need the higher voltage supply to make up for voltage drop due to resistance found in the power cable themselves. The longer the cable the larger the resistance and the more pronounced the voltage drop. You could compensate by increasing amperage (to make up for lost power) and using heavier gauge cables (to reduce the internal resistance and handle the increased amperage), but the accepted practice is to distribute a higher voltage to the equipment and use a DC-DC converter in the device or immediately at its power input to deliver the required voltage. This is because it's generally safer and cheaper (material costs, weight) to distribute higher voltage than higher current.
This is why telcos use 48Vdc and the aircraft industry (MIL-STD-704F) use 24 Vdc.
I'm skeptical of Schmidt's personal account of how Google implemented Java. It's not like Google is going to admit anything but a "clean room implementation". I put Google in the exact same boat as Oracle. Oracle must prove Google didn't do a "clean room implementation" and Google must prove that they did.
Neither of these corporate entities are that credible in the first place.
The reason nobody wants to do that is the fact that you'd go against the principles agreed to in the 5 space treaties that were agreed to by the UN's Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space. If you were caught militarizing low earth orbit then you'd pretty much shit canned international cooperation that was painstakingly negotiated over since Sputnik I for a possibly unreliable not to mention hard to accurately implement at LEO speeds missile defense system.
Not to me. Oklahoma City has 1/3 the population of Manhattan.
Playing the numbers game is down right distasteful.
Yet April 19th came and went without a mention. On April 19, 1995, the Alfred P. Murrah Building was destroyed when 4 American terrorists exploded a cargo van full of explosives. 169 people died including 19 children under the age of 6 and over 680 people were injured.
People said we shouldn't forget the Oklahoma City bombing... yet we did...
Seriously isn't there better things to throw your money into?
Venture capitalists who wants the patents to remain secret as long as possible so they may have a chance to market the patent after their initial investment defaults.
It seems slashdot has posted my reply to a different thread.... nice.
I remember in the good o' days when companies rushed their products to market and marked certain parts of it "patent pending". Now days venture capitalists are using these patents as collateral betting that the inventor's lack of business experience will allow the portfolio to fall into the VC's hands. Afterwards the VC will be free to profit from selling or licensing the patent to others. It seems this new "requirement' to maintain secrecy for "competitive reasons" is really a ploy to give venture capitalist more time to market the patent to others.
You'd think the patent itself would be protection enough and that this need for secrecy goes against the reasoning behind patents to begin with...
There seems to be a glitch in the matrix.
Is it okay to say that Objective-C and C is the same language too?
Actually 'C' is the "top dog" whereas 'C++' is #3 behind Java.
C recently had its standard updated and the uptick could be a reflection of this. Not to mention the increased exposure that C is getting from objective-C.
Actually it's Ruby on Rails that was the hype machine. The spikes in the graph seem to correlate to with Rails popularity. Ruby the language enjoyed an upsurge in popularity from its association with Rails. Despite RoR no longer being the new kid on the block, ruby the language is holding its own.
The GPL does not specify that the source code shall be available in perpetuity. It only specifies that the source code shall be distributed (or made available) to the end user at time of distribution. The end user is not required to make the source code available.
BSD and GPL have the same access to the source code.
Thank you for your clarification. It's already been pointed out in a different thread.
As a courtesy, I've always sent my modifications back to the original author and after all these years I assumed it was also a requirement of the GPL (ie. I've always done it, but don't remember why or bother to refresh my memory). The GPL is not something I read everyday.
I disagree. BSD is really about the people who RECEIVE the code because they can do as they like with it. GPL is really about the people who PROVIDE the code because they want their work and any of its derivatives to be open sourced.
GPL really doesn't offer any more freedom than the other open source licenses since, like similar arguments for other forms of digital media, the derivative works take nothing away from the original source code. However the GPL encourages more open source development since I would not have contributed my time or effort on something that can be tweaked, repackaged and sold as a closed source product without any means of me seeing or incorporating the improvements being made.
Quite simply I chose the GPL license over the BSD license because of what it provided me not because I was concerned with the end user's freedoms. It's a matter of perspective.
It's not just about state tax money. There are other sources of income (research grants, patent licensing, tuition) for the university. Does the University of Florida gets an appropriate share of the UAA revenue considering how much revenue the UAA generates with its affiliation with UF? In 2011, the UAA made $96.5 million and gave an unrestricted "contribution" of $4.8 million which is around 5%. Should UF demand more?
Since you did mentioned tax money, I found some interesting information while reading the UAA budget and its associated audit. Chapter 1006 Section 71 of Florida Statues allows the UAA to retain all of the state sales tax collected for use in women's athletics. For the years ending June 30, 2011 and June 30, 2010, the amount retained was $1.48 million and $1.49 million respectively. You thought they were profiting on just the inflated price of concessions?
I'm sure if I really look hard enough, I can find more fungible state money floating around.