I'm surprised it took this many comments to reach this solution, as it's what immediately popped into my mind when offline, versioned access was being requested.
One or more CSV files (or another line-based text format) in Git would allow for multiple simultaneous updates, offline, to be merged at a later date, and it would provide offline access to the most recent updates that you fetched when you were last able. Additionally, all historical changes, plus descriptive messages at each commit to say why the network changed the way it did.
The Humble Bundles seem to be helping with this, though. They're getting a lot of independent game studios to think about releasing for Linux, and they show that Linux controls nearly 1/4 of the gaming market. I'm hoping that this helps push similar changes up to the bigger studios.
I'm partial to "input" and "output" myself, from the perspective of the object using them (so a client's output goes to the server's input and vice-versa).
If you need to reference both objects' streams at the same time, you've got "myInput", "myOutput", "hisInput", and "hisOutput" for clarity.
Or just pick something fun; "spinwise" and "widdershins" isn't bad, but may confuse your users.
I was basing it on the average atomic weight of each element, in the first periodic table that came up on Google. It's been a while since my last chemistry class (11 years, I think), so I may have gotten it wrong.
But it looked like, since they said there were no radioactive byproducts of the reaction, that they were talking about the most stable (and therefore common) isotopes of each. Therefore, Ni-58 and Cu-63, resulting in an atomic weight difference of 5, which means they need to create 4 neutrons out of thin air.
But, like I said, high-school chemistry was a while ago.
I'm curious how they can get more energy out than they put in, at the same time as getting more MASS out than they put in. Copper is more than just a proton heavier than Nickel (63au vs 56au, I think). Conservation of energy/mass, anyone? Hydrogen+hydrogen fusion produces energy because the resulting helium is lighter than the inputs, and E=mc^2.
If you write your own, you may not want to include propagation beyond any single machine. No risk of getting out that way. Just make it tricky for a user to remove, to show the various techniques that may be needed (hiding in multiple places, being started from registry keys and other locations, running multiple processes that each monitor the others so it's tough to kill them all,...).
Good luck, and ask for permission before doing it!
Umm... It IS executable. It prints "EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE!" to the console when run as a COM program. It's just been added to the virus definitions of every piece of antivirus software to allow for simple, risk-free testing.
He referenced many old studies, but did not conduct his own. Every one of those old studies was biased in one way or another.
The few studies that he presents as unbiased, which found for QWERTY or for a tie, involved retraining typists, which is definitely a bias of some kind.
Nobody seems to have performed a study involving teaching first-time typists to see how long it takes to get to X WPM, or to see how fast they get after Y hours of training. That would be my definition of an unbiased study.
Of course, at this point, it'd be pretty tough to find someone who has never typed on anything before...
I use git at work because we were told to, but I am actually quite fond of it. I've even started using it to keep track of personal projects at home.
I like it because it has pretty good documentation and I can figure out most of what I need with a quick search, and because it generally does what I want when I want it to.
We switched to git from cvs about a year ago, and I am much happier for a few reasons that will also apply to subversion:
1) Repository info is only stored in one place, so you don't ever need to search out all of your CVS or.svn directories
2) Local commits make it easy to check stuff in whenever you need to, and then make it pretty (with git rebase -i commitid) before pushing to a central repo (assuming that's the model you are using)
3) There is a two-stage commit. You have the working tree (aka working copy), which is what you are editing, the 'index', which is where the changes you want in the current commit go, and the actual repository, which holds commits. With that extra step in between, you can check in only the parts of a file that are relevant to the current commit (with git add --patch filename). I have a tendency to do a bunch of editing everywhere, forgetting to commit, and then go back to make multiple commits of discrete features/bugfixes at the end of the day. I'm pretty sure you can't do that with CVS, and although I'm not sure about subversion, it would surprise me if you could do it there.
4) The repository keeps track of changes across multiple files, instead of tracking each file individually. That makes applying a bugfix from another branch really easy, since you don't need to hunt down every file that was modified by it.
So anyway, I'd suggest sticking with git, but there's no harm in trying other systems; you never know, what I like and what you like may be completely different.
I definitely agree for horizontal density. I find it much more difficult to read and understand a line like this:
x=(acos(sin(theta+PI/2)+cos(phi-PI/2))+PI)/4;
Than a line like this:
x = (acos(sin(theta + PI / 2) + cos(phi - PI / 2)) + PI) / 4;
In fact, I would probably split the line at the + between the sin and the cos, aligning the sin and cos vertically.
But anyway, I find that vertical density makes much less difference. As a result, I prefer the "cuddled" version. But there is one inconsistency that I will sometimes use:
// Comment describing the test
if (...) {
} // Comment describing the inverse of the test
else {
}
But that is pretty rare, since usually the test is simple and its inverse doesn't need an explanation.
I *love* John Varley's Titan series, I've read them three times. I think I was about 13 or 14 the first time, but like the parent said, there is "some sex stuff".
I definitely agree. I read these when I was in my early teens, and just finished them again. I was actually searching this page to see if anyone had mentioned this series.
Note, however, that there is some sexuality in these books.
I tried your suggestion of 242, 242, 0 but I prefer pastel-type colors, so I altered it to 242, 242, 128. It's a much softer yellow, hopefully it'll work out well. I just switched from black-on-white to white-on-black about an hour before this article came up on Slashdot, so I'm still tweaking colors.
Oh, I agree with you. I was being facetious about pulling out of Iraq, since that's what both of the Democratic candidates are promising. So when they pull out like they say they will, there will be leftover military funds.
Sorry for the confusion, it probably would have been more obvious in a face-to-face situation.:-)
I can't say who's more competent, as I haven't bothered to research much into either, but I definitely agree that it's a bad idea to take money away from the space program. How about taking it out of military funding? Not like they'll need so much after we pull them out of Iraq, right?
Interesting... If that exact law applied to the US, ComCast could be in bigger trouble than they are now:
(2) The transmission condition is that the service provider does not--
(a) initiate the transmission;
(b) select the recipient of the transmission; or
(c) select or modify the information contained in the transmission."
Well put. If ISPs should be held liable for what passes through their networks, it stands to reason that telephone companies should be liable for what passes through theirs (which I'm pretty sure is protected by common carrier laws in the US). The police don't try to stop people from discussing illegal activities over the phone, they just listen in when they get a warrant for a wiretap and catch the criminals in the act.
I suppose it's understandable that the RIAA is unhappy about how things are set up, since there are no criminal penalties (and therefore no police protection) related to copyright offenses, because it means private entities need to take charge of protecting themselves. Courts do not issue warrants to anybody but police, so they cannot wiretap the ISPs.
Suing the ISPs to make them block infringing traffic is definitely not the right answer, though, since there is no way of knowing whether any single packet contains copyrighted material, and whether that material has been licensed for transmission to the receiving party. Their best plan of action would probably be to make it legal to copy the music, but provide extras with purchased music that makes the purchase worthwhile. For example, NiN's special collector's album, which includes vinyl a photo album.
As a modification to the auction problem, how about setting a limit on 'damages' claimed in a patent suit to the value of the IP? Then you're paying taxes on the amount you can possibly make off of the IP for suing someone else.
I totally agree, that's how I learned, plus I needed to figure it out for college courses, because the CS machines were all Linux. Training will certainly speed up the process, but figuring it out for yourself is the best way, although probably the longest.
Nice idea with the virtual machine to make restoration easy. VMWare even has a snapshot ability, so when you shut down the machine you can restore the last snapshot if you screwed something up.
What I'm curious about is why programs' shared libraries are put in the system shared library directory (windows\system32). Wouldn't it make more sense to put system DLLs there, and program DLLs in a separate directory? It would make permission enforcement much easier. I know that there is a "program files\common files" directory, but I don't think most programs use it properly, and even then it's organized by program, so the "common" nature of the files is ruined by not being able to share them with other programs.
Slashdot Mirror
One or more CSV files (or another line-based text format) in Git would allow for multiple simultaneous updates, offline, to be merged at a later date, and it would provide offline access to the most recent updates that you fetched when you were last able. Additionally, all historical changes, plus descriptive messages at each commit to say why the network changed the way it did.
The Humble Bundles seem to be helping with this, though. They're getting a lot of independent game studios to think about releasing for Linux, and they show that Linux controls nearly 1/4 of the gaming market. I'm hoping that this helps push similar changes up to the bigger studios.
Except the fusion drives on the comets would make them visible as soon as you light up the fusion drives. At least, if anyone is watching... http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/spacewardetect.php#nostealth
... so just pick one and stick to it.
I'm partial to "input" and "output" myself, from the perspective of the object using them (so a client's output goes to the server's input and vice-versa).
If you need to reference both objects' streams at the same time, you've got "myInput", "myOutput", "hisInput", and "hisOutput" for clarity.
Or just pick something fun; "spinwise" and "widdershins" isn't bad, but may confuse your users.
I was basing it on the average atomic weight of each element, in the first periodic table that came up on Google. It's been a while since my last chemistry class (11 years, I think), so I may have gotten it wrong.
But it looked like, since they said there were no radioactive byproducts of the reaction, that they were talking about the most stable (and therefore common) isotopes of each. Therefore, Ni-58 and Cu-63, resulting in an atomic weight difference of 5, which means they need to create 4 neutrons out of thin air.
But, like I said, high-school chemistry was a while ago.
I'm curious how they can get more energy out than they put in, at the same time as getting more MASS out than they put in. Copper is more than just a proton heavier than Nickel (63au vs 56au, I think). Conservation of energy/mass, anyone? Hydrogen+hydrogen fusion produces energy because the resulting helium is lighter than the inputs, and E=mc^2.
I was very disappointed to see that it was a misspelling of "learn" instead of "leer." I was quite curious how a computer could leer from the Net...
If you write your own, you may not want to include propagation beyond any single machine. No risk of getting out that way. Just make it tricky for a user to remove, to show the various techniques that may be needed (hiding in multiple places, being started from registry keys and other locations, running multiple processes that each monitor the others so it's tough to kill them all, ...).
Good luck, and ask for permission before doing it!
Umm... It IS executable. It prints "EICAR-STANDARD-ANTIVIRUS-TEST-FILE!" to the console when run as a COM program. It's just been added to the virus definitions of every piece of antivirus software to allow for simple, risk-free testing.
Well put. Anyone got some spare mod points? Parent could use a few.
Agreed - in the end, QWERTY vs DVORAK is not a very useful example for anything except how not to do a study and the resilience of urban legends.
Well put, I'll agree with that.
However, he did not prove that Dvorak was an inferior layout, only that nobody has done a proper study in the 80 years since it was invented.
By not showing it to be an inferior layout, he cannot prove his own point that the market always chooses the best product.
He referenced many old studies, but did not conduct his own. Every one of those old studies was biased in one way or another.
The few studies that he presents as unbiased, which found for QWERTY or for a tie, involved retraining typists, which is definitely a bias of some kind.
Nobody seems to have performed a study involving teaching first-time typists to see how long it takes to get to X WPM, or to see how fast they get after Y hours of training. That would be my definition of an unbiased study.
Of course, at this point, it'd be pretty tough to find someone who has never typed on anything before...
I use git at work because we were told to, but I am actually quite fond of it. I've even started using it to keep track of personal projects at home.
I like it because it has pretty good documentation and I can figure out most of what I need with a quick search, and because it generally does what I want when I want it to.
We switched to git from cvs about a year ago, and I am much happier for a few reasons that will also apply to subversion:
1) Repository info is only stored in one place, so you don't ever need to search out all of your CVS or .svn directories
2) Local commits make it easy to check stuff in whenever you need to, and then make it pretty (with git rebase -i commitid) before pushing to a central repo (assuming that's the model you are using)
3) There is a two-stage commit. You have the working tree (aka working copy), which is what you are editing, the 'index', which is where the changes you want in the current commit go, and the actual repository, which holds commits. With that extra step in between, you can check in only the parts of a file that are relevant to the current commit (with git add --patch filename). I have a tendency to do a bunch of editing everywhere, forgetting to commit, and then go back to make multiple commits of discrete features/bugfixes at the end of the day. I'm pretty sure you can't do that with CVS, and although I'm not sure about subversion, it would surprise me if you could do it there.
4) The repository keeps track of changes across multiple files, instead of tracking each file individually. That makes applying a bugfix from another branch really easy, since you don't need to hunt down every file that was modified by it.
So anyway, I'd suggest sticking with git, but there's no harm in trying other systems; you never know, what I like and what you like may be completely different.
I definitely agree for horizontal density. I find it much more difficult to read and understand a line like this:
x=(acos(sin(theta+PI/2)+cos(phi-PI/2))+PI)/4;
Than a line like this:
x = (acos(sin(theta + PI / 2) + cos(phi - PI / 2)) + PI) / 4;
In fact, I would probably split the line at the + between the sin and the cos, aligning the sin and cos vertically.
But anyway, I find that vertical density makes much less difference. As a result, I prefer the "cuddled" version. But there is one inconsistency that I will sometimes use:
if (...) {
}
else {
}
But that is pretty rare, since usually the test is simple and its inverse doesn't need an explanation.
I *love* John Varley's Titan series, I've read them three times. I think I was about 13 or 14 the first time, but like the parent said, there is "some sex stuff".
I definitely agree. I read these when I was in my early teens, and just finished them again. I was actually searching this page to see if anyone had mentioned this series.
Note, however, that there is some sexuality in these books.
I tried your suggestion of 242, 242, 0 but I prefer pastel-type colors, so I altered it to 242, 242, 128. It's a much softer yellow, hopefully it'll work out well. I just switched from black-on-white to white-on-black about an hour before this article came up on Slashdot, so I'm still tweaking colors.
Oh, I agree with you. I was being facetious about pulling out of Iraq, since that's what both of the Democratic candidates are promising. So when they pull out like they say they will, there will be leftover military funds.
Sorry for the confusion, it probably would have been more obvious in a face-to-face situation. :-)
I can't say who's more competent, as I haven't bothered to research much into either, but I definitely agree that it's a bad idea to take money away from the space program. How about taking it out of military funding? Not like they'll need so much after we pull them out of Iraq, right?
Interesting... If that exact law applied to the US, ComCast could be in bigger trouble than they are now:
(2) The transmission condition is that the service provider does not--(a) initiate the transmission;
(b) select the recipient of the transmission; or
(c) select or modify the information contained in the transmission."
Well put. If ISPs should be held liable for what passes through their networks, it stands to reason that telephone companies should be liable for what passes through theirs (which I'm pretty sure is protected by common carrier laws in the US). The police don't try to stop people from discussing illegal activities over the phone, they just listen in when they get a warrant for a wiretap and catch the criminals in the act.
I suppose it's understandable that the RIAA is unhappy about how things are set up, since there are no criminal penalties (and therefore no police protection) related to copyright offenses, because it means private entities need to take charge of protecting themselves. Courts do not issue warrants to anybody but police, so they cannot wiretap the ISPs.
Suing the ISPs to make them block infringing traffic is definitely not the right answer, though, since there is no way of knowing whether any single packet contains copyrighted material, and whether that material has been licensed for transmission to the receiving party. Their best plan of action would probably be to make it legal to copy the music, but provide extras with purchased music that makes the purchase worthwhile. For example, NiN's special collector's album, which includes vinyl a photo album.
As a modification to the auction problem, how about setting a limit on 'damages' claimed in a patent suit to the value of the IP? Then you're paying taxes on the amount you can possibly make off of the IP for suing someone else.
I totally agree, that's how I learned, plus I needed to figure it out for college courses, because the CS machines were all Linux. Training will certainly speed up the process, but figuring it out for yourself is the best way, although probably the longest.
Nice idea with the virtual machine to make restoration easy. VMWare even has a snapshot ability, so when you shut down the machine you can restore the last snapshot if you screwed something up.
What I'm curious about is why programs' shared libraries are put in the system shared library directory (windows\system32). Wouldn't it make more sense to put system DLLs there, and program DLLs in a separate directory? It would make permission enforcement much easier. I know that there is a "program files\common files" directory, but I don't think most programs use it properly, and even then it's organized by program, so the "common" nature of the files is ruined by not being able to share them with other programs.