Actually it was proved conclusively that this is not true and MS lied to the judge about this
>>Its only so popular cos it was bundled with the o/s in the first place and it was there, so people used it
Again this is incorrect. IE sucked so bad that even giving it away free, noone would use it. People preferred to pay for Netscape. This is when MS started to force OEM's to bundle their crappy browser and not Netscape hence harming consumers. ---CONFLICT!!---
You are right that many of these concepts can and should be explained in simpler ways. One of the fairly sure ways of knowing if you truly understand a concept is to explain it to someone who knows little or nothing about it. If you can do it (in English or whatever human language you speak) in such a way that they can see what's "cool" about it then it's a fair bet that you have a very good grasp of the concept from a more rigorous technical perspective.
The difference is that I was speaking more from a perspective of someone who needed to intimately understand the concepts in order to use them to prove other related theorems.
"A picture is not a proof"
--Several of my professors
I think it boils down to the difference between Hawking's "A Brief History Of Time" and college texts on General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. To be able to develop and test new theories you need a firm grasp on the latter. To get funding for these projects you need books that can describe the incredible discoveries being made in such a way as to excite the interest of J.Q. Taxpayer.
I think it is more difficult to "laymanize" advanced, abstract mathematics than physics, since one of the main points of physics is that it is supposed to deal with the real world whereas a field of mathematical endeavor is considered "worthwhile" based on different criteria. Nonetheless I agree that a greater effort toward making some of these theories more accessable to the general public would be a good idea. ---CONFLICT!!---
>Personally I shudder to think what having to take all that math could do to a person if they had to get a job in something like computers
Let's see.. impeccable logic... a rock solid understanding of algorithms...Top notch problem *defining* and solving skills.
yeah, not too useful in computers.
>It seems that the higher you go in math the more bland and unapproachable the subject becoms and the more difficult (difficulty!) it become
While there is no arguing that higher mathematics is difficult to wrap your brain around, I would rephrase the first part of this sentence.
I got a BS in mathematics taking several Graduate classes in the process(Real Analysis (The Horror) and Differential Equations/Dynamical Systems) and I would say rather than "bland and unapproachable" : Incredibly beautiful, deep, elegant and powerful, but with a much higher price of admission than any other field.
>Why can't people produce a nice graphical textbook about complex math subjects with plents of examples and problems to work on?
Well even in relatively simple math courses i.e. past the basic calc/diffEQ/linear algebra/ 2 year series, you are dealing with n-dimensional spaces. The fact is there is no way to draw this. That is where the full power of the abstract approach is needed.
For example, take as your space the set of all functions from the real numbers to the real numbers. How the hell do you even draw anything dealing with this? If I remember correctly, this space has a cardinality ("number" of members) greater than that of the real numbers which is strictly greater than the usual "infinity" which is the cardinality of the Natural numbers/integers/rationals
>I think it's only in places in the US where people have the free time and material wealth to do research and be able to have means to feed themselves makes things like this possible
Well given that math and physics were almost completely re written a few hundred years ago by Newton(England) Leibnitz, 23(?) different Bernoullis(SP),Gauss, Cauchy, Cantor,Riemann (Germany), and a few French people whose names slip my mind:-) I think that this is a very poor take on this situation. Oops regarding computer theory we can't forget the Russians especially Kolmogorov
Are there any good textbooks (graphical, examples galore, problems) that would make someone an Einstein a little easier? Real world examples? Einstein was a genius who did very poorly in school. He was not even accepted to any grad schools until he completed his Nobel prize winning work (Not General or Special Relativity either).
There is no easy way to understand the advanced results of mathematics without struggling your way up. Some people will have an easier time than others, but I feel that it is worth it even if I never use the specific facts I learned.
Mathematics has many "real-world" uses that haven't been discovered yet. In general Mathematics is decades and often centuries ahead of the relevant scientific fields. Abstract Algebra (not like in high school) was considered the most esoteric useless field by non-mathematicians until it became indispensible in quantum guage theory.
Superstring theory is built upon Some-old-guy-or-other's Beta function and Symmetry group theory. General Relativity is written in the language of differential geometry.
To understand some of these theories is a mind blowing experience I would highly recommend.
Seriously though eve if you don't decide to pursue it you will be prepared for anything else you do want to do. You can go to grad school in almost any discipline, and your problem solving skills will exceed those of almost anyone you interview against for a job.
>>AOL is dumb, i think microsoft had the right idea, fuck having 10 different IM clients
This line shows your complete lack of understanding of this issue. Microsoft is the one who came in with their different client in a market which still has no need for it. ICQ is the IM standard. I am aware of no problems with it requiring "innovation" from monoposoft. They totally missed the parade on yet another emerging market and then bribed and extorted their way into it.
Personally I would not deign to converse with anyone so misinformed about so many things that they would use a redundant piece of crap like monoposoft's IM. ---CONFLICT!!---
I'm trying it out with NT (I'm at work) and it still doesn't work with our proxy (admittedly it might all be with our proxy).
Also it still doesn't work at all with javascript/CSS. I have a very simple test page with a few DIV's and a mouseover/mouseout which displays/hides the hidden parts. The basic structure is:
No, Apple licensed some technology from Xerox. Licensing is a concept you seem to be unfamiliar with due to your years as an M$ lapdog. This is the concept that when some person or company has a new technology they invented that you want to use, you pay them for the privilege. This is to be contrasted with M$'s policy of copying it and fighting the inevitable lawsuits. Or pretending to want to license it and then outright stealing it.
Microsoft hired Simonyi, the person at Xerox PARC, who developed the GUI that Apple copied
I know nothing about this person, but Apple's GUI was nothing like the one developed by Xerox, hence it couldn't have been copied.
Microsoft most certainly did NOT steal the GUI from Apple
What they did was threaten them with dropping all support for the Macintosh versions of their software if Apple didn't license their (not Xerox's) technology to M$. Apple, being an extremely innovative company, still managed to remain years ahead of M$ in ease of use, functionality, security, stability, and appearance. When M$ released the first version of Windows which was even marginally useful in 1995, 11 years after the debut of the Macintosh, it looked as close to the Mac UI as it was possible for M$ to make it without most of the actual functionality. I guess your definition of stealing is different than mine. People are welcome to have differing opinions, but you'll forgive me if I don't allow you near my property.
It could be said that Apple stole the GUI from Xerox, and Microsoft acquired it by hiring away it's developer.
Yes, it could, but it would be a lie. ---CONFLICT!!---
Actually my little astroturfer, IBM makes a little OS called AIX. Also BE is a PPC OS. Granted development has stopped on this platform but it is still in use.
Plus look at it this way now you can shop your skills out to the separate companies increasing your income if your current employer is broken up. ---CONFLICT!!---
M$ has their astroturf freedom to (dom)innovate pages up and going. My comment which I graciously gave them permission to publish was:
Congratulations to the Government. It is refreshing to see that once again the computer industry will have the freedom to innovate. Microsoft's aggressive policy of stifling creativity in the interest of dominating the computer marketplace has done incalculable harm to the industry. I only hope it is not too late to repair the damage. ---CONFLICT!!---
Re:Why Linux Supporters Should Be Excited About X-
on
More on the MS "X-Box"
·
· Score: 1
(can I use photoshop to write my own perl scripts to automagicly process images?)
No, but you can use AppleScript to do any amount of scripting not just with Photoshop but between PS and variuos other apps. ---CONFLICT!!---
Actually you can see this on a Macintosh. Falcon 3 is written for 3 monitors; left, right and forward views.
You do need 3 video cards though, but they can be at different resolutions and bit depths.
Side question, I've never seen multi-monitors on windows since they finally realized this was a good idea. Can you have different resolutuions and bit depths? ---CONFLICT!!---
Now, considering that the telecom industry has been in bed with the NSA since the days of morse code
HEHEHEHEH. If you read AfterY2K, picture the evil NSA men climbing telegraph poles installing their abacus-based scanners on the lines. At least until super-buff Linus and the TTB's save the day.
Slashdot Mirror
Aquent called me up the other day and have an interview for me.
And my Dad works for USAir(ways whatever).
---CONFLICT!!---
>> cos Microsoft "proved" it was part of the O/S
Actually it was proved conclusively that this is not true and MS lied to the judge about this
>>Its only so popular cos it was bundled with the o/s in the first place and it was there, so people used it
Again this is incorrect. IE sucked so bad that even giving it away free, noone would use it. People preferred to pay for Netscape. This is when MS started to force OEM's to bundle their crappy browser and not Netscape hence harming consumers.
---CONFLICT!!---
different things. No flame inferred :-)
You are right that many of these concepts can and should be explained in simpler ways. One of the fairly sure ways of knowing if you truly understand a concept is to explain it to someone who knows little or nothing about it. If you can do it (in English or whatever human language you speak) in such a way that they can see what's "cool" about it then it's a fair bet that you have a very good grasp of the concept from a more rigorous technical perspective.
The difference is that I was speaking more from a perspective of someone who needed to intimately understand the concepts in order to use them to prove other related theorems.
"A picture is not a proof"
--Several of my professors
I think it boils down to the difference between Hawking's "A Brief History Of Time" and college texts on General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. To be able to develop and test new theories you need a firm grasp on the latter. To get funding for these projects you need books that can describe the incredible discoveries being made in such a way as to excite the interest of J.Q. Taxpayer.
I think it is more difficult to "laymanize" advanced, abstract mathematics than physics, since one of the main points of physics is that it is supposed to deal with the real world whereas a field of mathematical endeavor is considered "worthwhile" based on different criteria.
Nonetheless I agree that a greater effort toward making some of these theories more accessable to the general public would be a good idea.
---CONFLICT!!---
can get bar none!
:-) I think that this is a very poor take on this situation.
>Personally I shudder to think what having to take all that math could do to a person if they had to get a job in something like computers
Let's see.. impeccable logic... a rock solid understanding of algorithms...Top notch problem *defining* and solving skills.
yeah, not too useful in computers.
>It seems that the higher you go in math the more bland and unapproachable the subject becoms and the more difficult (difficulty!) it become
While there is no arguing that higher mathematics is difficult to wrap your brain around, I would rephrase the first part of this sentence.
I got a BS in mathematics taking several Graduate classes in the process(Real Analysis (The Horror) and Differential Equations/Dynamical Systems) and I would say rather than "bland and unapproachable"
:
Incredibly beautiful, deep, elegant and powerful, but with a much higher price of admission than any other field.
>Why can't people produce a nice graphical textbook about complex math subjects with plents of examples and problems to work on?
Well even in relatively simple math courses i.e. past the basic calc/diffEQ/linear algebra/ 2 year series, you are dealing with n-dimensional spaces.
The fact is there is no way to draw this. That is where the full power of the abstract approach is needed.
For example, take as your space the set of all functions from the real numbers to the real numbers. How the hell do you even draw anything dealing with this? If I remember correctly, this space has a cardinality ("number" of members) greater than that of the real numbers which is strictly greater than the usual "infinity" which is the cardinality of the Natural numbers/integers/rationals
>I think it's only in places in the US where people have the free time and material wealth to do research and be able to have means to feed themselves makes things like this possible
Well given that math and physics were almost completely re written a few hundred years ago by
Newton(England) Leibnitz, 23(?) different Bernoullis(SP),Gauss, Cauchy, Cantor,Riemann (Germany), and a few French people whose names slip my mind
Oops regarding computer theory we can't forget the Russians especially Kolmogorov
Are there any good textbooks (graphical, examples galore, problems) that would make someone an Einstein a little easier? Real world examples?
Einstein was a genius who did very poorly in school. He was not even accepted to any grad schools until he completed his Nobel prize winning work (Not General or Special Relativity either).
There is no easy way to understand the advanced results of mathematics without struggling your way up. Some people will have an easier time than others, but I feel that it is worth it even if I never use the specific facts I learned.
Mathematics has many "real-world" uses that haven't been discovered yet. In general Mathematics is decades and often centuries ahead of the relevant scientific fields. Abstract Algebra (not like in high school) was considered the most esoteric useless field by non-mathematicians until it became indispensible in quantum guage theory.
Superstring theory is built upon Some-old-guy-or-other's Beta function and Symmetry group theory.
General Relativity is written in the language of differential geometry.
To understand some of these theories is a mind blowing experience I would highly recommend.
Seriously though eve if you don't decide to pursue it you will be prepared for anything else you do want to do. You can go to grad school in almost any discipline, and your problem solving skills will exceed those of almost anyone you interview against for a job.
---CONFLICT!!---
>>AOL is dumb, i think microsoft had the right idea, fuck having 10 different IM clients
This line shows your complete lack of understanding of this issue. Microsoft is the one who came in with their different client in a market which still has no need for it. ICQ is the IM standard. I am aware of no problems with it requiring "innovation" from monoposoft. They totally missed the parade on yet another emerging market and then bribed and extorted their way into it.
Personally I would not deign to converse with anyone so misinformed about so many things that they would use a redundant piece of crap like monoposoft's IM.
---CONFLICT!!---
I think it wouldn't be any surprise to anyone who listened to his music that he hung himself.
Kind of like all those people who were "surprised" by Kurt Cobain when he had a song called "I hate myself and want to die"
---CONFLICT!!---
If you notice I use DIV tags, not layer tags.
It turns out that it is the document.layers.....
that screwed it up.
---CONFLICT!!---
Thanks. I've been looking for a page like that for a while.
---CONFLICT!!---
Looks over at copy of Perl Cookbook
heh cool.
Nice work
---CONFLICT!!---
I'm trying it out with NT (I'm at work)
/STYLE
m =20;)
and it still doesn't work with our proxy (admittedly it might all be with our proxy).
Also it still doesn't work at all with
javascript/CSS.
I have a very simple test page with a few DIV's and a mouseover/mouseout which displays/hides the hidden parts. The basic structure is:
STYLE TYPE="text/css"
#corporate {
position: absolute;
visibility: show;
top: 290;
left: 200;
width: 450;
height: 135;
clip: rect(0,150,20,0);
z-index: 1
}
onmouseover
(window.document.layers['corporate'].clip.botto
this is all missing the brackets around the tags and other stuff.
This works perfectly in Netscape, but all I get in any Mozilla is a bunch of overlapping text.
---CONFLICT!!---
We need a new moderation category.
Something like, "idiot", or "misinformative",
or "dead wrong".
Macs do now have an AGP port.
Who is the worthless moderator who marked this informative?!?
---CONFLICT!!---
OK, how about this one.
God is good, infallible, and all powerful.
Babies are born deformed or dead.
That to me is a contradiction.
Given that the second statement is a fact, God must be either evil, fallible, or not all powerful.
Granted this isn't a mathematical "proof", or
even a really good scientific argument (which is impossible given the subject), but it works for me.
---CONFLICT!!---
Wow.
I'll have to read that.
---CONFLICT!!---
After Ultima ]I[ it was all over.
;-p
.sig
No more taking over towns, killing all the guards and looting to your hearts content. No, now you have to be nice to people
Actually I'm just about done playing Ultima ]I[ again on the Mac version.
Hehe note the
---CONFLICT!!---
How else would all those iMacs run it?
---CONFLICT!!---
A CRT doesn't shoot light, it shoots Cathode Rays otherwise known as electrons. These, unlike photons do have an electrical charge.
---CONFLICT!!---
Apple copied the GUI developed by Xerox at PARC
No, Apple licensed some technology from Xerox. Licensing is a concept you seem to be unfamiliar with due to your years as an M$ lapdog. This is the concept that when some person or company has a new technology they invented that you want to use, you pay them for the privilege. This is to be contrasted with M$'s policy of copying it and fighting the inevitable lawsuits. Or pretending to want to license it and then outright stealing it.
Microsoft hired Simonyi, the person at Xerox PARC, who developed the GUI that Apple copied
I know nothing about this person, but Apple's GUI was nothing like the one developed by Xerox, hence it couldn't have been copied.
Microsoft most certainly did NOT steal the GUI from Apple
What they did was threaten them with dropping all support for the Macintosh versions of their software if Apple didn't license their (not Xerox's) technology to M$.
Apple, being an extremely innovative company, still managed to remain years ahead of M$ in ease of use, functionality, security, stability, and appearance. When M$ released the first version of Windows which was even marginally useful in 1995, 11 years after the debut of the Macintosh, it looked as close to the Mac UI as it was possible for M$ to make it without most of the actual functionality.
I guess your definition of stealing is different than mine. People are welcome to have differing opinions, but you'll forgive me if I don't allow you near my property.
It could be said that Apple stole the GUI from Xerox, and Microsoft acquired it by hiring away it's developer.
Yes, it could, but it would be a lie.
---CONFLICT!!---
If she is wearing a skirt you would serve the additional purpose of blocking a strategic line-of-sight as she gets out of the car.
---CONFLICT!!---
This isn't CD's after all. like in the pre revision "Road Ahead".
---CONFLICT!!---
I guess we'll just have to throw That Silly Finnish Guy ;-) in the lockup.
Can anyone say Jailbreak
---CONFLICT!!---
Actually my little astroturfer, IBM makes a little OS called AIX. Also BE is a PPC OS. Granted development has stopped on this platform but it is still in use.
Plus look at it this way now you can shop your skills out to the separate companies increasing your income if your current employer is broken up.
---CONFLICT!!---
display of common sense by our government.
HEHE
M$ has their astroturf freedom to (dom)innovate
pages up and going. My comment which I graciously gave them permission to publish was:
Congratulations to the Government.
It is refreshing to see that once again the computer industry will have the freedom to innovate.
Microsoft's aggressive policy of stifling creativity in the interest of dominating the computer marketplace has done incalculable harm to the industry.
I only hope it is not too late to repair the damage.
---CONFLICT!!---
(can I use photoshop to write my own perl scripts to automagicly process images?)
No, but you can use AppleScript to do any amount of scripting not just with Photoshop but between PS and variuos other apps.
---CONFLICT!!---
Actually you can see this on a Macintosh.
Falcon 3 is written for 3 monitors; left, right and
forward views.
You do need 3 video cards though, but they can be at different resolutions and bit depths.
Side question, I've never seen multi-monitors on windows since they finally realized this was a good idea. Can you have different resolutuions and bit depths?
---CONFLICT!!---
Now, considering that the telecom industry has been in bed with the NSA since the days of morse code
HEHEHEHEH. If you read AfterY2K, picture the evil
NSA men climbing telegraph poles installing their abacus-based scanners on the lines.
At least until super-buff Linus and the TTB's save the day.
---CONFLICT!!---