If you just skim through K&R, then yes, I can see why you'd think it was 'just on C'. But if you actually sit down and work through the problems, you'll find a lot more depth. Of course, it's all C code, but some of those exercises are deceptively challenging, and they really helped me to move beyond the mechanics of the language and start thinking about coding in a more sophisticated way.
I not only read K&R, it was the book that taught me to code in C.
Getting beyond the mechanics of a programming language and learning to code in a more sophisticated way doesn't just happen by reading a book, it's something brought on by experience both in coding and in studying other people's work. That's one of the things I love most about open source -- you have the opportunity study the work of the source community's finest coders, from Linus Torvalds to RMS to Andrew Tridgell.
Mmmm....while I tend to agree, if you're happy plugging a regular ol' telephone into a box, then it doesn't matter.:) I'll bet there's some way for me to hack the LinkSys VoIP router I have from them.
With the $25 a month, you get unlimited calls to the U.S and most of the rest of North America, plus a phone router, plus a real phone number with voicemail, caller ID, free incoming calls, 3-way calling, etc., etc., a bunch of stuff you don't get with Skype.
Plus he wouldn't have to budget his time on the phone, he can talk all he wants and not worry about how much it's costing him.
And like the other guy said: if he were a studly man with 60 girlfriends in 60 countries, that would save him a bundle.:-P
You might want to check out my current VoIP provider, Vonage. They're offering a plan that includes unlimited calls to over 60 countries when you sign up for a one year contract for $24.99 a month. I believe China is included in the 60 countries, but I can't link it since there seems to be something wrong with their website at the moment. Anyway, seems like it would be a good deal for you.
Right. The four books you mentioned aren't books for teaching you about a programming language or a particular technique, unlike K&R, which focuses just on C. They are designed to teach how to think like a programmer and how write code like professional software developer. They are more about the fundamental nature of coding; they're not as much about trying to teach you the basics as they are about trying to teach you what you really need to know to successfully take a programming project through the development cycle as a coder.
The founding fathers, for instance, were not religious madmen who thought it was a good idea to have religion play a major role in society. The current leadership is. That's just one thing... now can you name others?
No, they were not. And the current leadership? No. Even Bush wasn't really a fundamentalist madman. Yes, there are a few idiots out there making loud noises, but the fact of the matter is they are very much in the minority.
The vast majority of Americans believe in a secular government and they believe in the separation of church and state.
He really would restrict your rights and regulate the hell out of video games and the rest of the online world that in his eyes is destroying the morals of America.
But can he really believe that? I mean, seriously, most historians and anthropologists would agree that the "morals of America" haven't changed very much in 230+ years. I just don't think people have a problem discerning between video games and reality.
Neither are you. A shopping bag lined with foil can act as a Faraday cage as well, but that still doesn't mean it's going to be effective against a wide range of frequencies, and certainly not against signals that are very powerful. From the article you quote:
The effectiveness of a Faraday cage or shield is dependent upon the wavelength of the electric or electromagnetic fields it is intended to shield. Effectiveness of shielding also depends upon the types of metals used in the cages as well as their thicknesses.
This guy in TFA makes it sound as if all I'd have to do to stop a radio station from transmitting is paint their tower with his paint.
It is 4k to apply for a registrars license, then 2500 a year (USD). Then it is.20 cents a domain. Your company must have 70k in working capital and I believe 500k in assets to become a registrar.
Many small businesses would qualify. $70K in working capital on $500K in assets is pretty close to average for established, moderately-sized small IT business with around 20 employees or so.
They said "can" and "could", not "does" and "will". There might be a switch. Or even different versions, which I guess makes a little more sense.
Yeah, that's kinda what I'm on about, just doing it in a roundabout way. I'm no physicist, but it doesn't seem to be that a *single* RF absorbing paint could block everything from 1 Mhz-100 GHz, or even 1.5 GHz - 200 GHz. That's just too many frequencies for something like paint. 1 foot thick lead vault, okay, but paint? Mmmmmm...let's just say I kinda doubt it.
While paints blocking lower frequencies have been available for some time, Mr Ohkoshi's technology is the first to absorb frequencies transmitting at 100GHz (gigahertz). Signals carrying a larger amount of data - such as wireless internet - travel at a higher frequency than, for example, FM radio.
...
"Our current mobile phones work at much lower frequencies, around 1.5 gigahertz. But, our material can also absorb frequencies that low, so you could block phone signals from outside and stop people's phones ringing during the movie," he said.
From the sounds of it, just about anything below 100 GHz gets blocked. That means cellphones, too.
This is the part where you don't get to be libertarian without a license.;) In a libertarian/anarcho-capitalist world, the government wouldn't own the roads. You would pay to drive on privately-owned roads. You get into too many accidents due to your texting-while-driving or, really, for any reason, and it'll be very simple: the road owner would likely ban you from his road as being hazardous to his other customers. Sooner or later you get banned from so many roads and you can't go anywhere!
So why the hell is a third- or tenth-order minor benefit listed described as the prime reason behind this research?
If you can make ships more efficient in the water, making ships that run on renewable sources becomes more possible. Steam- and diesel-powered vessels were invented to improve speed (and capacity) in the water. The more you can improve the efficiency, the more speed you can get out of less and less energy. Which makes things like wind power (sails) or solar power (electricity) more and more of a possibility.
Dude, what what would you do if I told you (truthfully!) that sebum is all over your body? It's all over your hair, your skin, etc.
Yeah. That's because sebum is a term that refers to the natural oils that coat your hair and skin. It's what makes your hair and skin waterproof and what protects them from drying out.
Okay, so how does this apply to this situation? Only someone using their Android with a drool-proof shield wrapped around it could possibly think that the CyanogenMod ROM came from Google.
Trademarks have nothing to do with distribution, or at least not in the way you think.
If I buy a Nike T-Shirt. It has a Nike logo on it. If I sell it to you, did I just commit trademark infringement? No? Why not?
I can write Gmail, Gmail, Gmail all day long and Google can't sue me so long as I'm referring to Google's product and I'm not using it to imply that I am the provider of or affiliated with Gmail or Google in any way.
Now if the binaries are modified in anyway, they are NOT Gmail and Google Maps and Google Docs. At that point, I'm trying to pass off a derivative work as Gmail or Google Maps. Now I'm infringing on copyrights and trademarks!
You would think that, with a Democratic majority, this sort of stuff would pass without much trouble. This administration is too nice to the Republican minority.
It's not a Republican vs. Democratic issue. I know it seems like it, but it's not. The Democrats are going to put on a nice show for all of us to show us that they at least "tried", but in the end, this won't pass. Big telecom has powerful lobbies, and the TPTB in the military and civilian intelligence agencies have all deemed telecom immunity to be too important to national security.
3. You may copy and distribute the Program (or a work based on it, under Section 2) in object code or executable form under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above provided that you also do one of the following:
a) Accompany it with the complete corresponding machine-readable source code, which must be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or,
b) Accompany it with a written offer, valid for at least three years, to give any third party, for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source distribution, a complete machine-readable copy of the corresponding source code, to be distributed under the terms of Sections 1 and 2 above on a medium customarily used for software interchange; or, (rest of section 3 omitted since it's irrelevant here)
Empahsis mine.
Basically, edu4 could have either distribute the source with the binaries or accompany the binaries with a written offer to distribute the source to any third parties. (I suppose they technically could have done both and still be in compliance, but that seems rather redundant)
This is a real case of "he says she says...". We need more clear-cut evidence. Who is telling the truth?
True. All we have are Google's and Apple's statements to the FCC. However, when Apple says they are "investigating an app" in the App Store, we have all seen that this effectively means that they have rejected it, but due to popularity, notoriety, or for various other reasons, they are not willing to come out and say "The app is rejected." The app will sit "in investigation" forever, effectively rejected without getting Apple's hands dirty.
OTOH, I suspect that Google may have an actual rejection letter. If they do, they should just post it as the egg on Apple's face would be priceless.:)
Google already supports Mobile Terminal Google code project for jail broken iPhones/iTouches, so the precedent is there.
Just because an app is hosted on Google Code doesn't mean that Google officially supports or endorses it. Google Code is similar to Sourceforge: they accept virtually any and all projects that are licensed under an OSI-approved license.
Agreed -- mostly. You're right in that just because something is possible doesn't mean it's likely.
OTOH, there are a number of likely scenarios and we are certainly no better off security-wise than we were before 9/11. Sticking a bunch of rent-a-cops in front of possible terrorist targets and airport terminals and giving them metal detectors and bomb sniffers will stop only the casual terrorist who hasn't thought things through.
From what we know now, the 9/11 terrorist attacks took years of planning. Do you really think that terrorists who are willing to wait in the wings for years, plotting and scheming the whole time aren't already systematically testing this 'new' security for weaknesses?
Don't be stupid and above all, do not trust the DHS when they tell you that we are more secure. Because we are certainly not.
No. Mac OS X doesn't use a *BSD-derived kernel and is therefore not a *BSD. Mac OS X's kernel is called 'XNU' and it's based on Mach 3.0. It does have a BSD subsystem in the kernel, and the userland is a mix of BSD and GNU utilities, but it's not *BSD. (The BSD subsystem itself is derived from FreeBSD 5.x.) I guess you could say Mac OS X has stuff that is derived from BSD, but on whole I'd have to say OS X is something other than BSD.
Slashdot Mirror
If you just skim through K&R, then yes, I can see why you'd think it was 'just on C'. But if you actually sit down and work through the problems, you'll find a lot more depth. Of course, it's all C code, but some of those exercises are deceptively challenging, and they really helped me to move beyond the mechanics of the language and start thinking about coding in a more sophisticated way.
I not only read K&R, it was the book that taught me to code in C.
Getting beyond the mechanics of a programming language and learning to code in a more sophisticated way doesn't just happen by reading a book, it's something brought on by experience both in coding and in studying other people's work. That's one of the things I love most about open source -- you have the opportunity study the work of the source community's finest coders, from Linus Torvalds to RMS to Andrew Tridgell.
Mmmm....while I tend to agree, if you're happy plugging a regular ol' telephone into a box, then it doesn't matter. :) I'll bet there's some way for me to hack the LinkSys VoIP router I have from them.
With the $25 a month, you get unlimited calls to the U.S and most of the rest of North America, plus a phone router, plus a real phone number with voicemail, caller ID, free incoming calls, 3-way calling, etc., etc., a bunch of stuff you don't get with Skype.
Plus he wouldn't have to budget his time on the phone, he can talk all he wants and not worry about how much it's costing him.
And like the other guy said: if he were a studly man with 60 girlfriends in 60 countries, that would save him a bundle. :-P
Not true. Here's a recent PCWorld story (too lazy to search for the /. story) It's called Google Voice.
(Disclaimer: I do not work for Vonage, nor do I own any Vonage stock and I do not represent them. I'm just a happy customer.)
You might want to check out my current VoIP provider, Vonage. They're offering a plan that includes unlimited calls to over 60 countries when you sign up for a one year contract for $24.99 a month. I believe China is included in the 60 countries, but I can't link it since there seems to be something wrong with their website at the moment. Anyway, seems like it would be a good deal for you.
Right. The four books you mentioned aren't books for teaching you about a programming language or a particular technique, unlike K&R, which focuses just on C. They are designed to teach how to think like a programmer and how write code like professional software developer. They are more about the fundamental nature of coding; they're not as much about trying to teach you the basics as they are about trying to teach you what you really need to know to successfully take a programming project through the development cycle as a coder.
The founding fathers, for instance, were not religious madmen who thought it was a good idea to have religion play a major role in society. The current leadership is. That's just one thing... now can you name others?
No, they were not. And the current leadership? No. Even Bush wasn't really a fundamentalist madman. Yes, there are a few idiots out there making loud noises, but the fact of the matter is they are very much in the minority.
The vast majority of Americans believe in a secular government and they believe in the separation of church and state.
He really would restrict your rights and regulate the hell out of video games and the
rest of the online world that in his eyes is destroying the morals of America.
But can he really believe that? I mean, seriously, most historians and anthropologists would agree that the "morals of America" haven't changed very much in 230+ years. I just don't think people have a problem discerning between video games and reality.
Why is he still going? Don't they make him pay his opponent's costs when he loses? Shouldn't he be broke?
No. You don't automatically pay your opponent's costs when you lose in the U.S. They can ask the judge to grant it, but it doesn't always happen.
Neither are you. A shopping bag lined with foil can act as a Faraday cage as well, but that still doesn't mean it's going to be effective against a wide range of frequencies, and certainly not against signals that are very powerful. From the article you quote:
This guy in TFA makes it sound as if all I'd have to do to stop a radio station from transmitting is paint their tower with his paint.
Somehow, I doubt that's going to work.
It is 4k to apply for a registrars license, then 2500 a year (USD). Then it is .20 cents a domain. Your company must have 70k in working capital and I believe 500k in assets to become a registrar.
Many small businesses would qualify. $70K in working capital on $500K in assets is pretty close to average for established, moderately-sized small IT business with around 20 employees or so.
They said "can" and "could", not "does" and "will". There might be a switch. Or even different versions, which I guess makes a little more sense.
Yeah, that's kinda what I'm on about, just doing it in a roundabout way. I'm no physicist, but it doesn't seem to be that a *single* RF absorbing paint could block everything from 1 Mhz-100 GHz, or even 1.5 GHz - 200 GHz. That's just too many frequencies for something like paint. 1 foot thick lead vault, okay, but paint? Mmmmmm...let's just say I kinda doubt it.
Try reading more carefully:
FTFA:
From the sounds of it, just about anything below 100 GHz gets blocked. That means cellphones, too.
This is the part where you don't get to be libertarian without a license. ;) In a libertarian/anarcho-capitalist world, the government wouldn't own the roads. You would pay to drive on privately-owned roads. You get into too many accidents due to your texting-while-driving or, really, for any reason, and it'll be very simple: the road owner would likely ban you from his road as being hazardous to his other customers. Sooner or later you get banned from so many roads and you can't go anywhere!
So why the hell is a third- or tenth-order minor benefit listed described as the prime reason behind this research?
If you can make ships more efficient in the water, making ships that run on renewable sources becomes more possible. Steam- and diesel-powered vessels were invented to improve speed (and capacity) in the water. The more you can improve the efficiency, the more speed you can get out of less and less energy. Which makes things like wind power (sails) or solar power (electricity) more and more of a possibility.
Dude, what what would you do if I told you (truthfully!) that sebum is all over your body? It's all over your hair, your skin, etc.
Yeah. That's because sebum is a term that refers to the natural oils that coat your hair and skin. It's what makes your hair and skin waterproof and what protects them from drying out.
Okay, so how does this apply to this situation? Only someone using their Android with a drool-proof shield wrapped around it could possibly think that the CyanogenMod ROM came from Google.
Trademarks have nothing to do with distribution, or at least not in the way you think.
If I buy a Nike T-Shirt. It has a Nike logo on it. If I sell it to you, did I just commit trademark infringement? No? Why not?
I can write Gmail, Gmail, Gmail all day long and Google can't sue me so long as I'm referring to Google's product and I'm not using it to imply that I am the provider of or affiliated with Gmail or Google in any way.
Now if the binaries are modified in anyway, they are NOT Gmail and Google Maps and Google Docs. At that point, I'm trying to pass off a derivative work as Gmail or Google Maps. Now I'm infringing on copyrights and trademarks!
You would think that, with a Democratic majority, this sort of stuff would pass without much trouble. This administration is too nice to the Republican minority.
It's not a Republican vs. Democratic issue. I know it seems like it, but it's not. The Democrats are going to put on a nice show for all of us to show us that they at least "tried", but in the end, this won't pass. Big telecom has powerful lobbies, and the TPTB in the military and civilian intelligence agencies have all deemed telecom immunity to be too important to national security.
You're both almost right.
Empahsis mine.
Basically, edu4 could have either distribute the source with the binaries or accompany the binaries with a written offer to distribute the source to any third parties. (I suppose they technically could have done both and still be in compliance, but that seems rather redundant)
This is a real case of "he says she says...". We need more clear-cut evidence. Who is telling the truth?
True. All we have are Google's and Apple's statements to the FCC. However, when Apple says they are "investigating an app" in the App Store, we have all seen that this effectively means that they have rejected it, but due to popularity, notoriety, or for various other reasons, they are not willing to come out and say "The app is rejected." The app will sit "in investigation" forever, effectively rejected without getting Apple's hands dirty.
OTOH, I suspect that Google may have an actual rejection letter. If they do, they should just post it as the egg on Apple's face would be priceless. :)
Google already supports Mobile Terminal Google code project for jail broken iPhones/iTouches, so the precedent is there.
Just because an app is hosted on Google Code doesn't mean that Google officially supports or endorses it. Google Code is similar to Sourceforge: they accept virtually any and all projects that are licensed under an OSI-approved license.
Agreed -- mostly. You're right in that just because something is possible doesn't mean it's likely.
OTOH, there are a number of likely scenarios and we are certainly no better off security-wise than we were before 9/11. Sticking a bunch of rent-a-cops in front of possible terrorist targets and airport terminals and giving them metal detectors and bomb sniffers will stop only the casual terrorist who hasn't thought things through.
From what we know now, the 9/11 terrorist attacks took years of planning. Do you really think that terrorists who are willing to wait in the wings for years, plotting and scheming the whole time aren't already systematically testing this 'new' security for weaknesses?
Don't be stupid and above all, do not trust the DHS when they tell you that we are more secure. Because we are certainly not.
Mac OS X doesn't count as a BSD?
No. Mac OS X doesn't use a *BSD-derived kernel and is therefore not a *BSD. Mac OS X's kernel is called 'XNU' and it's based on Mach 3.0. It does have a BSD subsystem in the kernel, and the userland is a mix of BSD and GNU utilities, but it's not *BSD. (The BSD subsystem itself is derived from FreeBSD 5.x.) I guess you could say Mac OS X has stuff that is derived from BSD, but on whole I'd have to say OS X is something other than BSD.