I think we just said the same thing, but I didn't need a shift key to say it.
What I am saying is, his ideas of evolution, if traced backwards, end where? So grow a new lobe.
Now, onto your second quip.
Survival of the fittest has very much somethng to do with evolution
Hrm, wrong. That is like saying 3rd degree burns have everything to do with Hydrogen bombs.
Yes, evolution, or a state of change (not talking Evolution as it were, but lets say introducing a new species into a country for the sake of argument) can bring about state wherein a renewed batch of competition.
Now, linking them is all too convenient to say evolution makes changes, and the good changes carry on with survival of the fittest, and evolution is mutation + survival of the fittest.
But it is wrong because evolution is more than a simple concept it is something that tries to infer, all but not quite, that we came from little single celled creatures (which is why my first point is valid, the rest was MISSED, for whatever reason).
Now, survival of the fittest happens every day, on every traffic light, when the one guy pulls away first, when one puppy is stronger and feeds more.
The reason they cannot be intwined, is because one says 'something that is better will succeed' and the other says, 'hey, we came from single celled things, and lets forget about how complex a single celled organism is, perhaps the complexity evolved, and like, maybe the concept of DNA, you know, that random uncomplicated stuff, also evolved!'
You see. I mean, DNA, how simple and unrandom is that!
I listened to the entire crew conversations on bbc.co.uk via streaming audio.
It wasn't given any ghey name, I just listened, it was great, I could heard them calling out rolls pitches, deltas, and it was quite spooky, at one point the hairs on my neck stood on end.
Now. FFS. They obviously used the same audio channel to record his 'mp3'. So I wouldn't even say this qualifies as 'recording an mp3 in space and copying the file to somewhere else'. Just recording the perfectly good live stream, which was mulitplexed around the world by hundreds of carriers, and fed into thousands of live streams.
Why did my stream not have a stupid name? Because it was before all those hyperventilating twats/cunts (delete as applicable) figured out how to use a computer, you know the type, not really giving anything back to society... and now they are all over the web, spreading their disease of the cult mind.
They are so spassy, they have spawned plenty of sites just to help them copy and blog and spunk over each others mindless drivel.
The noise on google is worse every day, as 100 million self proclaimed experts carry out their duty to write about everything and everything (actually, whatever they can find on other peoples blogs) and then repost them as stories on as many sites as they can, to drive traffic, which makes them happy, and feel needed in society.
My word of the day seems to fit this quite well:
To confirm you're not a script, please type the word in this image: panted
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
Hey listen to my podca*crunk-sound of face being caved in*.
I mean, XML showing the locations of mp3 files... and... wait for it... titles and or descriptions.
And people then suddenly, amazingly, think this new technology is an ENABLER of something they couldn't do before, so everyone has to now record audio.
And the problem is, they are literally forcing themselves to do so, and the content is so fucking contrived. phew, nuff trolling.
The mind works in a rather non linear way - preemtively sending signals through so many weird connections: which is why we can get caught out with word games that trick our answers.
Imagine walking through the airport thinking:
This party is going to be the bomb! When do I board the airplane?
or worse:
I hope not terrorists carry bombs ontot he plane and blow us up! look at all this security, why are they looking at me! (and then you start to sweat)
You then get shot, in the head, with an elephant gun, at close range, while being rubber gloved by a man with very large hands.
Not a nice thought. Oh man check out my word of the day!!
To confirm you're not a script, please type the word in this image: implants
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
I could create a webpage with this invalid statistic, I could use tools to register different sites, skin them, auto gen content, put this invalid statistic in and flood google with new definitions.
Valid sites like the BBC may misquote the statistic.
So, given that the intarwebnet can contain many sources, why are you so worried that the ONE source that lets say, menace tod_miller can modify, be incorrect? Since I could modify my own version on my own site?
The issue is the brand/profile of the site: wikipedia.org. As a small project noone cares about - then it doesn't matter. But as the unwashed masses [maybe in IT hacking terms, we should call that the washed masses?] rush to find out what the latest buzz is, then it is a high profile site that may be open to have many of its statistics deliberately modified.
Again, I haven't actually seen any wikipedia vandalism, I think even the trolls on/. don't get a buzz of modifying something they are allowed.
Of course, some people can eek fun out of anything. And I am sure many l33t h3x0rz have found the 'edit page' exploit on wikipedia that allows them full edit control without 4uth0r1z4tion. l33t.
To confirm you're not a script, please type the word in this image: indigo
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
And thought, "shit! my computer can get gonorrhea!!" (also known as Vista pka Longhorn)
Anyway, so what. Prediction: 1 week after Vista based servers come out, my internet will mysteriously slow down as a new attack wreaks havoc on all my fav pr0n sites.:-(
Slashdotters. If you value your geekery, do not buy an xbox. I am pretty miffed at the numbers who did on here (you know who you are!). Just think. Cell architecture. YOU KNOW linux is going to be working on PS3 much cooler than XBOX, and you just know the best use for all this new technology is to run tux racer, so just think about it!
Which is whack - check out:
The Inquirer and TotalVideogames claim that Wal-Mart employees apparently have leaked the launch date and price of the Xbox 360. According to these reports, the Xbox 360 will retail for $299 and the launch will be Friday, November 4th.
Now, personally, I think this article was a little FUDDY, but customers may wait out for the PS3, i.e. when making a choice, wait for the second option, when it appears, it always looks newer and sexier. Now, Christmas may make a hiccup in these strategies, but XBox is aiming for this period.
If people decide to wait for next gen, then a 99$ pstwo may leap in sales, this christmas may be the christmas for PStwo and PSP!!
People might step over the Xbox launch, to look at handhelds, and then wait out for the next next-gen , the PS3.
Console release is like F1 pit tactics. YOu have to release a console, but when?
PS1 relied on some great timing and release games. Will the XBOX and the PS3 both delay and build up their game offerings until one makes the first move?
I think the PS3 will not delay to be honest - Christmas is looming, and if they can release in time for this, then they will lead in many respects.
My newphew (who as you may have heard knows everything about every gaming platform, game and addon) sold his PS2 (for much more than the $70 described in the recent/. article) but kept his gamecube, and shrugged, I am sure someone will buy me a PS3 for Christmas. He thinks the XBOX/360 sucks, and doesn't even know who Microsoft are.
Aaaanyway. The innocence of youth.
This next gen of consoles may break some more competitors out of the ring. As multiplayer gets hotter, and platform exclusive games get more prevelant, then for the consumers one platform is the best choice, as kids want to play the same games together.
Therefore this may be a case of survival of the fittest, and my money is on PS3, as sony have 2 very successful releases under their belts, and XBOX was just a couple of trillion gajillion dollars of advertising, and Halo, which was a SHIT game, and I don't care what you say. An FPS with vehicles that feels like tribes, but can the playability of a 1997 game.
To confirm you're not a script, please type the word in this image: condemn
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
Has anyone emailed and found out what happens if you are visually impaired?
Wasn't there a website called pushing crates at one point? My friends first opengl programming gaem was a pushing crates game with an ascii file map format, good stuff!
Other gaming cliches of the 00's should be 'Naked Patches!'.
Quite a few games have that 'puzzle' section that annoyed people, sometimes on the amiga this formed part of the copy protection, which I liked!
The problem with a lot of the 'cliches' is they are just game elements... collecting things - that is a core game element - and bullet time, not even over used, slowing down game aciton ala action replays is a great thing, and I dont think it should be removed!
#1 was exploding barrels. *thinks* yes, in GTA you can shoot barrels to get rid of enemies, and in many other games... but I love it.
Boom boom boom.
I think the next list will talk about duping, crafting, selling things on ebay etc etc... or 'rare' items...
How can we teach conflicting views? Of course, 'evolution' isn't the opposite of creationism, or even the same thing. So when people talk about darwinism it is a bit annoying.
The big bang, and abiogenisis is the alternative. Hot gases form from nothing (and gravity, light, energy, matter, quarks pi and everything else magically comes into existence), cool to form rocks and water, and then two rocks hit each other, say ow, learn to swim fly and walk.
You see, darwin missed out the whole 'rocks grows fins/tail/legs/wings' part of his analysis.
Survival of the fittest is also nothign to do with evolution, ir is a seperate facet (that can exist without any 'evolutionary' phases).
I agree that science should stick to teaching kids how to perform experiments, and how to find things out, AND NOT PUSH ANY science on them that is unproven.
Just to drive this home: Why at 15/16 when we are learning about gravity and stuff, do they aleways throw in 'how the universe got created'. We never get tested on it (or shouldn't be) nothing is proven / disproven.
Why not SKIP this whole section? SKIP IT! Go on.
To confirm you're not a script, please type the word in this image: himself
I can sell you my address, but heck if I have a post box there.
Valid emails are one thing, but allowing you to use MY EMAIL SERVER? My shiney email server? Heck no. Find some other way of using their email addresses!
Personally, I realise that these email addresses are pwned by the uni, and the students could probably get rammed up the ass with as many 'notices' and spam as they like (my uni covered this well). So selling the email addresses is not that bad... well it is... but they didn't sell out the students per se.
I have full rights over my email server.
We had free printing until someone printing 20000 flyers for local restaurants.
You can have empty Javadoc comments, and I am not ENTIRELY sure you are correct - does javadoc binary reflect all methods, even those without comments?
If it doesn't, then there are still empty comments - and I am not 100% for or against Javadoc, I preffer the code is clear and readable, but on top of that I appreciate Javadoc immensly (just look at some good example Javadocs in the JDK itself and many libraries)
Did I say they need 5 parameters? I am just saying if you have a block of logic, readability can sometimes be improved by naming two methods the outcome of one key decision block, then the rough work gets done, but you keep the individual method simple, so when someone wants to double check a part of that method they can easily ascertain (human readability) the intent, and logic of that method (and if it is null safe, handles certain conditions you are checking for).
Yes, it isn't for 100% of the time, but I didn't say that.
Then the method signatures for callMethodA() and callMethodB() become really long, and add to the run time.
It will not have any impact on performance, if you want to 'final' the methods, go ahead (the byte code will be indistinguishable then), but any programmer (who is not working on real time or signal processing applications, FFT's, or wavelet transforms or fractal processing) who thinks about performance before he sees a performance bottle neck is not a programmer. He is a PHB.
Of particular note is their discussion of the pros and cons of using both signature and non signature-based methods of intrusion detection.
signature based == $$$$ from signature updates
non-signature based: Tight sandboxing around network priviledged apps, and new 'untrusted' content on the system. Behavioural monitoring, like an internal firewall - mime type priveledges - hang on '-rwxr-xr-x ana.kournivova.jpg' cannot access other executable files! It is not allowed to!
-rwxr-xr-x gimp however is allowed to read and list filre system, and access and modify all image* mime types. (and compressed files that contain image mime types etc like svg.gz).
So there you have it. How to remove viruses, like an internal firewall of application permissions (which is already inherent with run as user and stuff, but mime type priviledges are a new idea I think).
To confirm you're not a script, please type the word in this image: skidding
and could you have written a less informative post?
it is not a news source, it is a NewsSource[], where each element is a pointer (reference in post 1990's terms) to a news source, which is an informatve article.
The job of the post is to describe the contents of the news source, which it did quite accurately.
It is the job of coral cache, mirrordot and karma whores [and assholes like piquepaille] to mirror the content verbatim.
To answer your rhetorical question (every rhetorical question deserves an answer;-) - yes he could have written a less informative post:
He could have omitted the topic of the article, and the URL of the article, which would have been rather fun.
Ergo cogito sum a genius.
To confirm you're not a script, please type the word in this image: digitize
(Can we have British English automated-human test images please, you insensitive clods!)
Code should be a mix of self commenting, and comments where a non-obvious work around was applied.
Here is the answer to your question:
public int getAge() {
return age; }
public int getNumberOfDaysUntilNextBirthday() {
return nextBirthday - today; }
You see, self documenting, now a bad example: (IMHO)/**
* Dispose method that calls a cleanup method.
* This method is called when the object is
* disposed
* @author Suck
*/ public void dispose() {
cleanup(); }
You see, bad because: the comment is bigger than the method, the person who wrote the comment didn't even write the method, but put an attribution for writing this comment... the existence of a comment would draw undue attention as a seasoned programmer would think it must be a special case to warrant such an epic description. The method itself is a simple built in method overridden to possibly cleanup some resources in a nice error friendly way (in case of borking). The comment literally describes the code, not the function (syntax not semantics). The person who wrote it was an arrogant twat.
I could go on, but an example where code is necessary is when you want to clarify the possible return conditions (if a method is null safe etc)
if you do have a largish method, write the meat of it in a line, so you know how to use it. If you have a 10 parameter graphics method that draws a boofork on the screen, desribe those parameters, dont write:
@param String[] args The arguments
tsk. Code should be written neatly so it is self commenting like:
if (condition)
loads of lines of code else
loads of lines of code
becomes
if(condition)
callMethodA(); else
callMethodB();
Now a maintainer would see, ok, if X then this or that, and can skip over now, as the NAME of the method becomes a nice double edged weapon - it comments the code, and removes the complexity from the method, and now you have two simpler methods with nice names that say what they do.
A method that should be called checksTwoConditionsAndThenDoesTheAppropriateAction sAndReturnsTheRightValue obviously might need some reworking if it is too complex, an can be broken up neatly.
It helps - software engineering is more like writting a novel than building an engine.
To confirm you're not a script, please type the word in this image: groups
Supports captions through Microsoft's SAMI (synchronized accessible media interchange, or *.smi files, are basically Microsoft's answer to RealPlayer's *.smil or "smile" files)
Does it support this microsoft extedned bullshit, or is it a typo they misread? I think.smil or.smi are acceptable, if it is the SMIL standard. (IF you have hand coded smil, you will know it is quite nice - subs are sone with XML streaming text format)
At least it supports ogg... I can only assume the previous error is indeed an error.
I would say it looks ok, the 'science' part seems (on the surface, pun intended) a little shallow - and the effects look like starwars episode 4 (the dodging of shots on the moving hover vehicles).
But, that aside, I hope the acting and story can push this into a mainstream audience, and perhaps even entertain!
Aside from this, the 'unique future' seems a little cliche actually, and tired formula, are there any new concepts in this?
Slashdot Mirror
Both, this article sucks man, talking about 360 coming out, ps3 delay, pstwo price changes, xbox price changes, argh my head, ffs.
BECAUSE HE DID NOT STUDY IT
darwin missed out
I think we just said the same thing, but I didn't need a shift key to say it.
What I am saying is, his ideas of evolution, if traced backwards, end where? So grow a new lobe.
Now, onto your second quip.
Survival of the fittest has very much somethng to do with evolution
Hrm, wrong. That is like saying 3rd degree burns have everything to do with Hydrogen bombs.
Yes, evolution, or a state of change (not talking Evolution as it were, but lets say introducing a new species into a country for the sake of argument) can bring about state wherein a renewed batch of competition.
Now, linking them is all too convenient to say evolution makes changes, and the good changes carry on with survival of the fittest, and evolution is mutation + survival of the fittest.
But it is wrong because evolution is more than a simple concept it is something that tries to infer, all but not quite, that we came from little single celled creatures (which is why my first point is valid, the rest was MISSED, for whatever reason).
Now, survival of the fittest happens every day, on every traffic light, when the one guy pulls away first, when one puppy is stronger and feeds more.
The reason they cannot be intwined, is because one says 'something that is better will succeed' and the other says, 'hey, we came from single celled things, and lets forget about how complex a single celled organism is, perhaps the complexity evolved, and like, maybe the concept of DNA, you know, that random uncomplicated stuff, also evolved!'
You see. I mean, DNA, how simple and unrandom is that!
1) Google for: clean up word html
1.1) Click I am lucky (if you type it yourself)
1.2) Download and use HtmlTidy, without checking I am sure it is the first hit.
2) I don't think you have to worry about keeping your sanity. Too late.
Congratulations! How did you pass the job interview?
Nevermind.
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: involve
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
I listened to the entire crew conversations on bbc.co.uk via streaming audio.
It wasn't given any ghey name, I just listened, it was great, I could heard them calling out rolls pitches, deltas, and it was quite spooky, at one point the hairs on my neck stood on end.
Now. FFS. They obviously used the same audio channel to record his 'mp3'. So I wouldn't even say this qualifies as 'recording an mp3 in space and copying the file to somewhere else'. Just recording the perfectly good live stream, which was mulitplexed around the world by hundreds of carriers, and fed into thousands of live streams.
Why did my stream not have a stupid name? Because it was before all those hyperventilating twats/cunts (delete as applicable) figured out how to use a computer, you know the type, not really giving anything back to society... and now they are all over the web, spreading their disease of the cult mind.
They are so spassy, they have spawned plenty of sites just to help them copy and blog and spunk over each others mindless drivel.
The noise on google is worse every day, as 100 million self proclaimed experts carry out their duty to write about everything and everything (actually, whatever they can find on other peoples blogs) and then repost them as stories on as many sites as they can, to drive traffic, which makes them happy, and feel needed in society.
My word of the day seems to fit this quite well:
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: panted
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
Hey listen to my podca*crunk-sound of face being caved in*.
I mean, XML showing the locations of mp3 files... and... wait for it... titles and or descriptions.
And people then suddenly, amazingly, think this new technology is an ENABLER of something they couldn't do before, so everyone has to now record audio.
And the problem is, they are literally forcing themselves to do so, and the content is so fucking contrived. phew, nuff trolling.
The mind works in a rather non linear way - preemtively sending signals through so many weird connections: which is why we can get caught out with word games that trick our answers.
Imagine walking through the airport thinking:
This party is going to be the bomb! When do I board the airplane?
or worse:
I hope not terrorists carry bombs ontot he plane and blow us up! look at all this security, why are they looking at me! (and then you start to sweat)
You then get shot, in the head, with an elephant gun, at close range, while being rubber gloved by a man with very large hands.
Not a nice thought. Oh man check out my word of the day!!
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: implants
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
SWEET!
I could create a webpage with this invalid statistic, I could use tools to register different sites, skin them, auto gen content, put this invalid statistic in and flood google with new definitions.
/. don't get a buzz of modifying something they are allowed.
Valid sites like the BBC may misquote the statistic.
So, given that the intarwebnet can contain many sources, why are you so worried that the ONE source that lets say, menace tod_miller can modify, be incorrect? Since I could modify my own version on my own site?
The issue is the brand/profile of the site: wikipedia.org. As a small project noone cares about - then it doesn't matter. But as the unwashed masses [maybe in IT hacking terms, we should call that the washed masses?] rush to find out what the latest buzz is, then it is a high profile site that may be open to have many of its statistics deliberately modified.
Again, I haven't actually seen any wikipedia vandalism, I think even the trolls on
Of course, some people can eek fun out of anything. And I am sure many l33t h3x0rz have found the 'edit page' exploit on wikipedia that allows them full edit control without 4uth0r1z4tion. l33t.
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: indigo
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
And thought, "shit! my computer can get gonorrhea!!" (also known as Vista pka Longhorn)
:-(
Anyway, so what. Prediction: 1 week after Vista based servers come out, my internet will mysteriously slow down as a new attack wreaks havoc on all my fav pr0n sites.
Slashdotters. If you value your geekery, do not buy an xbox. I am pretty miffed at the numbers who did on here (you know who you are!). Just think. Cell architecture. YOU KNOW linux is going to be working on PS3 much cooler than XBOX, and you just know the best use for all this new technology is to run tux racer, so just think about it!
Which is whack - check out:
The Inquirer and TotalVideogames claim that Wal-Mart employees apparently have leaked the launch date and price of the Xbox 360. According to these reports, the Xbox 360 will retail for $299 and the launch will be Friday, November 4th.
From Aug 2nd told at some site
Now, personally, I think this article was a little FUDDY, but customers may wait out for the PS3, i.e. when making a choice, wait for the second option, when it appears, it always looks newer and sexier. Now, Christmas may make a hiccup in these strategies, but XBox is aiming for this period.
If people decide to wait for next gen, then a 99$ pstwo may leap in sales, this christmas may be the christmas for PStwo and PSP!!
People might step over the Xbox launch, to look at handhelds, and then wait out for the next next-gen , the PS3.
Console release is like F1 pit tactics. YOu have to release a console, but when?
/. article) but kept his gamecube, and shrugged, I am sure someone will buy me a PS3 for Christmas. He thinks the XBOX/360 sucks, and doesn't even know who Microsoft are.
PS1 relied on some great timing and release games. Will the XBOX and the PS3 both delay and build up their game offerings until one makes the first move?
I think the PS3 will not delay to be honest - Christmas is looming, and if they can release in time for this, then they will lead in many respects.
My newphew (who as you may have heard knows everything about every gaming platform, game and addon) sold his PS2 (for much more than the $70 described in the recent
Aaaanyway. The innocence of youth.
This next gen of consoles may break some more competitors out of the ring. As multiplayer gets hotter, and platform exclusive games get more prevelant, then for the consumers one platform is the best choice, as kids want to play the same games together.
Therefore this may be a case of survival of the fittest, and my money is on PS3, as sony have 2 very successful releases under their belts, and XBOX was just a couple of trillion gajillion dollars of advertising, and Halo, which was a SHIT game, and I don't care what you say. An FPS with vehicles that feels like tribes, but can the playability of a 1997 game.
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: condemn
random letters - if you are visually impaired, please email us at pater@slashdot.org
Has anyone emailed and found out what happens if you are visually impaired?
Wasn't there a website called pushing crates at one point? My friends first opengl programming gaem was a pushing crates game with an ascii file map format, good stuff!
Other gaming cliches of the 00's should be 'Naked Patches!'.
Quite a few games have that 'puzzle' section that annoyed people, sometimes on the amiga this formed part of the copy protection, which I liked!
The problem with a lot of the 'cliches' is they are just game elements... collecting things - that is a core game element - and bullet time, not even over used, slowing down game aciton ala action replays is a great thing, and I dont think it should be removed!
#1 was exploding barrels. *thinks* yes, in GTA you can shoot barrels to get rid of enemies, and in many other games... but I love it.
Boom boom boom.
I think the next list will talk about duping, crafting, selling things on ebay etc etc... or 'rare' items...
How can we teach conflicting views? Of course, 'evolution' isn't the opposite of creationism, or even the same thing. So when people talk about darwinism it is a bit annoying.
The big bang, and abiogenisis is the alternative. Hot gases form from nothing (and gravity, light, energy, matter, quarks pi and everything else magically comes into existence), cool to form rocks and water, and then two rocks hit each other, say ow, learn to swim fly and walk.
You see, darwin missed out the whole 'rocks grows fins/tail/legs/wings' part of his analysis.
Survival of the fittest is also nothign to do with evolution, ir is a seperate facet (that can exist without any 'evolutionary' phases).
I agree that science should stick to teaching kids how to perform experiments, and how to find things out, AND NOT PUSH ANY science on them that is unproven.
Just to drive this home: Why at 15/16 when we are learning about gravity and stuff, do they aleways throw in 'how the universe got created'. We never get tested on it (or shouldn't be) nothing is proven / disproven.
Why not SKIP this whole section? SKIP IT! Go on.
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: himself
I can sell you my address, but heck if I have a post box there.
Valid emails are one thing, but allowing you to use MY EMAIL SERVER? My shiney email server? Heck no. Find some other way of using their email addresses!
Personally, I realise that these email addresses are pwned by the uni, and the students could probably get rammed up the ass with as many 'notices' and spam as they like (my uni covered this well). So selling the email addresses is not that bad... well it is... but they didn't sell out the students per se.
I have full rights over my email server.
We had free printing until someone printing 20000 flyers for local restaurants.
You can have empty Javadoc comments, and I am not ENTIRELY sure you are correct - does javadoc binary reflect all methods, even those without comments?
If it doesn't, then there are still empty comments - and I am not 100% for or against Javadoc, I preffer the code is clear and readable, but on top of that I appreciate Javadoc immensly (just look at some good example Javadocs in the JDK itself and many libraries)
Did I say they need 5 parameters? I am just saying if you have a block of logic, readability can sometimes be improved by naming two methods the outcome of one key decision block, then the rough work gets done, but you keep the individual method simple, so when someone wants to double check a part of that method they can easily ascertain (human readability) the intent, and logic of that method (and if it is null safe, handles certain conditions you are checking for).
Yes, it isn't for 100% of the time, but I didn't say that.
People will be bitching they are still using wheels on the shuttle, and fire for the thrust...
These ancient technologies are outdated, and should be replaced as soon as possible with something else.
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: construe
Then the method signatures for callMethodA() and callMethodB() become really long, and add to the run time.
It will not have any impact on performance, if you want to 'final' the methods, go ahead (the byte code will be indistinguishable then), but any programmer (who is not working on real time or signal processing applications, FFT's, or wavelet transforms or fractal processing) who thinks about performance before he sees a performance bottle neck is not a programmer. He is a PHB.
I know, but this was a redundant method to comment, that was my point. I know javadoc.
Of particular note is their discussion of the pros and cons of using both signature and non signature-based methods of intrusion detection.
signature based == $$$$ from signature updates
non-signature based: Tight sandboxing around network priviledged apps, and new 'untrusted' content on the system. Behavioural monitoring, like an internal firewall - mime type priveledges - hang on '-rwxr-xr-x ana.kournivova.jpg' cannot access other executable files! It is not allowed to!
-rwxr-xr-x gimp however is allowed to read and list filre system, and access and modify all image* mime types. (and compressed files that contain image mime types etc like svg.gz).
So there you have it. How to remove viruses, like an internal firewall of application permissions (which is already inherent with run as user and stuff, but mime type priviledges are a new idea I think).
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: skidding
and could you have written a less informative post?
;-) - yes he could have written a less informative post:
it is not a news source, it is a NewsSource[], where each element is a pointer (reference in post 1990's terms) to a news source, which is an informatve article.
The job of the post is to describe the contents of the news source, which it did quite accurately.
It is the job of coral cache, mirrordot and karma whores [and assholes like piquepaille] to mirror the content verbatim.
To answer your rhetorical question (every rhetorical question deserves an answer
He could have omitted the topic of the article, and the URL of the article, which would have been rather fun.
Ergo cogito sum a genius.
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: digitize
(Can we have British English automated-human test images please, you insensitive clods!)
Code should be a mix of self commenting, and comments where a non-obvious work around was applied.
/**
n sAndReturnsTheRightValue obviously might need some reworking if it is too complex, an can be broken up neatly.
Here is the answer to your question:
public int getAge() {
return age;
}
public int getNumberOfDaysUntilNextBirthday() {
return nextBirthday - today;
}
You see, self documenting, now a bad example: (IMHO)
* Dispose method that calls a cleanup method.
* This method is called when the object is
* disposed
* @author Suck
*/
public void dispose() {
cleanup();
}
You see, bad because: the comment is bigger than the method, the person who wrote the comment didn't even write the method, but put an attribution for writing this comment... the existence of a comment would draw undue attention as a seasoned programmer would think it must be a special case to warrant such an epic description. The method itself is a simple built in method overridden to possibly cleanup some resources in a nice error friendly way (in case of borking). The comment literally describes the code, not the function (syntax not semantics). The person who wrote it was an arrogant twat.
I could go on, but an example where code is necessary is when you want to clarify the possible return conditions (if a method is null safe etc)
if you do have a largish method, write the meat of it in a line, so you know how to use it. If you have a 10 parameter graphics method that draws a boofork on the screen, desribe those parameters, dont write:
@param String[] args The arguments
tsk. Code should be written neatly so it is self commenting like:
if (condition)
loads of lines of code
else
loads of lines of code
becomes
if(condition)
callMethodA();
else
callMethodB();
Now a maintainer would see, ok, if X then this or that, and can skip over now, as the NAME of the method becomes a nice double edged weapon - it comments the code, and removes the complexity from the method, and now you have two simpler methods with nice names that say what they do.
A method that should be called checksTwoConditionsAndThenDoesTheAppropriateActio
It helps - software engineering is more like writting a novel than building an engine.
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: groups
Supports captions through Microsoft's SAMI (synchronized accessible media interchange, or *.smi files, are basically Microsoft's answer to RealPlayer's *.smil or "smile" files)
.smil or .smi are acceptable, if it is the SMIL standard. (IF you have hand coded smil, you will know it is quite nice - subs are sone with XML streaming text format)
WHAT THE FUCK! SMIL is an XML mulitmedia synch language with 10 areas of functionality. The Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language is not from Real - although they HAVE turned themselves around and made a nice implementation, without extending it *COUGH*adobe-svg*cough*.
Does it support this microsoft extedned bullshit, or is it a typo they misread? I think
At least it supports ogg... I can only assume the previous error is indeed an error.
Without typo link - fsk it!!!
Yeah, I typo'd it seeing if I could get a higher res version...
Trailer 2 here, right click and save file as...
They had trailer 2 above trailer 1, a bit counter intuitive... (or not for bloggites).
I would say it looks ok, the 'science' part seems (on the surface, pun intended) a little shallow - and the effects look like starwars episode 4 (the dodging of shots on the moving hover vehicles).
But, that aside, I hope the acting and story can push this into a mainstream audience, and perhaps even entertain!
Aside from this, the 'unique future' seems a little cliche actually, and tired formula, are there any new concepts in this?
Downloadable link
Right click 'Save Link As...'
To confirm you're not a script,
please type the word in this image: arrack