The first computer scientists were really mathematicians
Well they had to be. At a low level, programming, and computers for that matter, are really nothing more than dynamic math.
But I do agree. A solid coder knows his math, although he may not be required to flex all too often. I've found algorithmic analysis to be pretty useful.
It's actually not that bad, although I'm sure results vary. I played around with a reader awhile back (something everyone should try, it's an eye-opening experience...or ear-opening? whatever...) and it dealt with changing page contents quite easy, notifying the user that something had occurred and reading the new contents.
I find the trick is not to take too many notes. If you really listen to what the prof is saying, there really isn't any need.
I guess I'm not the typical student, as I enjoy almost every lecture I attend, but I really do feel as if the way to learn is to listen, and not to write and learn later.
And even thinking about a laptop is insanity to me. Talk about distaction!
Yeah, I don't know if I really buy that...or the people with the guns are all out in the boondocks. I've lived here all my life (in both British Columbia and a few parts of southern Ontario), and I've seen what, 2 or 3 guns (police officer handguns excluded).
When my friends and I saw that as we were watching, we all just looked at each other and shrugged.
And if those stats are true, they're certainly hunting rifles, not handguns.
But I don't believe him. All he did is made me question whether it's a good idea to jump on the bandwagon.
And he might be a (bad) science fiction writer, but that's really beside the point. The work is footnoted extensively (almost to the point where I felt like I was doing work). I'm not a stupid guy. I don't believe everything I'm told. I could even feel his bias as I read his words, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a hint of truth in what he's saying. Just made me question, that's all.
So I do understand what you're saying. I'm not against the cause.
The only mistake I made was running my mouth on Slashdot before even doing so much as looking at his sources. Sorry about that.
It was that new Crichton book, State of Fear, which isn't very good, but he did do some interesting research. It's footnoted pretty extensively. I'll try to find the source of his numbers.
And don't go thinking that I'm not doing my part. I drive very little, only renting a car when I can't take a train. I use public transit every day. If you looked at my contribution to greenhouse gases compared to almost anyone you'd find that I was much lower.
I'm just saying that I'm not going to go ahead and believe anything either way when everybody is panicking and shouting in my ear. The world will not end tomorrow.
I just read that ice globally is increasing at a rate of 19.8 gigatons. I'm not so convinced this is the problem everyone is making it out to be.
I once heard someone say, "global warming is at best a theory, and at worst pure fiction". There is more at work here than you know. The climate is extremely complex, and very few experts are saying things in such black and white terms.
Something else that most people don't understand is that when something in software is difficult, you write libraries to add layers of abstraction. You only have to write the really tough code once, then it's smooth sailing.
Slashdot Mirror
Glue all orifices of your buddy's body shut.
That'll show him after the syran wrap on the toilet bit.
Yeah, but this guy is a Cybersecurity Adviser. A king among men. He should know better.
Well that's all nice and good, but have you ever had to prove your programs mathematically?
It's not fun.
Simply put, most code would not live up to rigorous mathematically analysis.
The first computer scientists were really mathematicians
Well they had to be. At a low level, programming, and computers for that matter, are really nothing more than dynamic math.
But I do agree. A solid coder knows his math, although he may not be required to flex all too often. I've found algorithmic analysis to be pretty useful.
#1
It's actually not that bad, although I'm sure results vary. I played around with a reader awhile back (something everyone should try, it's an eye-opening experience...or ear-opening? whatever...) and it dealt with changing page contents quite easy, notifying the user that something had occurred and reading the new contents.
Yeah, but what about smoking cigarettes while performing Google queries.
Awesome cool.
I tagged it 'icare'. Looks like we got it up there. ;)
Someone mod this guy up. Hilarious.
I don't know about anyone else, but I would be embarrassed to own a computer that looks like an alien's head.
I find the trick is not to take too many notes. If you really listen to what the prof is saying, there really isn't any need.
I guess I'm not the typical student, as I enjoy almost every lecture I attend, but I really do feel as if the way to learn is to listen, and not to write and learn later.
And even thinking about a laptop is insanity to me. Talk about distaction!
Cocoa and Cocoa applications are written in Objective-C. It is not garbage collected and is still very close to the metal.
.NET in the sense that it is the platform that Apple pushes its developers to use when writing applications.
It is only similar to
This seems like a more and more likely option to me.
If you put the DRM in the hardware itself, hacks and workarounds become much tougher (and maybe impossible without chip replacement).
Who's to say the DRM won't be a part of the hardware itself?
My comment was not on the United States. I can only speak for small part of Canada that I live in. :)
Yeah, I don't know if I really buy that...or the people with the guns are all out in the boondocks. I've lived here all my life (in both British Columbia and a few parts of southern Ontario), and I've seen what, 2 or 3 guns (police officer handguns excluded). When my friends and I saw that as we were watching, we all just looked at each other and shrugged. And if those stats are true, they're certainly hunting rifles, not handguns.
But I don't believe him. All he did is made me question whether it's a good idea to jump on the bandwagon.
And he might be a (bad) science fiction writer, but that's really beside the point. The work is footnoted extensively (almost to the point where I felt like I was doing work). I'm not a stupid guy. I don't believe everything I'm told. I could even feel his bias as I read his words, but that doesn't mean that there isn't a hint of truth in what he's saying. Just made me question, that's all.
So I do understand what you're saying. I'm not against the cause.
The only mistake I made was running my mouth on Slashdot before even doing so much as looking at his sources. Sorry about that.
But this isn't about weight, it's about volume and density...isn't it?
From what you've said, it's perfectly logical.
:)
And I didn't even know that ice expanded, so you know I'm ignorant. Englighten me.
It was that new Crichton book, State of Fear, which isn't very good, but he did do some interesting research. It's footnoted pretty extensively. I'll try to find the source of his numbers.
And don't go thinking that I'm not doing my part. I drive very little, only renting a car when I can't take a train. I use public transit every day. If you looked at my contribution to greenhouse gases compared to almost anyone you'd find that I was much lower.
I'm just saying that I'm not going to go ahead and believe anything either way when everybody is panicking and shouting in my ear. The world will not end tomorrow.
Wait, I just stopped and thought about this.
If water expands when frozen, wouldn't that mean that melting floating ice would result in a decrease in sea level?
Oh, cool. :)
Well, wouldn't it have at least a little bit?
From my science knowledge (high school), shoudn't the liquid state of water take up more space than the solid state?
I just read that ice globally is increasing at a rate of 19.8 gigatons. I'm not so convinced this is the problem everyone is making it out to be.
I once heard someone say, "global warming is at best a theory, and at worst pure fiction". There is more at work here than you know. The climate is extremely complex, and very few experts are saying things in such black and white terms.
I agree.
Something else that most people don't understand is that when something in software is difficult, you write libraries to add layers of abstraction. You only have to write the really tough code once, then it's smooth sailing.
Interesting idea.
I'll be sure to give this a try.