Learn about *what* exactly? What's on TV or the internet that they simply *must* learn?
That was really a reference to the "world outside".
I don't know if you have kids or not...
Three - all in their 20's now. And nothing pleased me more than when they worked out that something was "wrong" based on their own experiences, rather than me having to tell them so (at which point they often disagreed, and usually put up some good arguments for their views).
So I prefer to give general guidelines, let them know that I'll (try to) help with any problems then let them get on with it. They did things differently to how I would have done them, but it all worked for them, and I reckon they're the better for having their own experiential learning, rather than any proscriptive edicts from me.
Any parent who just turns the kids loose on the net is NUTS. There is a huge percentage of trash out there and it is irresponsible to just let a kid access this junk either on purpose or by accident.
Do you ban watching TV too? There's a huge percentage of trash there. And what about the "world outside", or are they banned from there too?
"What if you could build a computer that works just like the human brain? You could invent new forms of industrial machinery, create fully autonomous thinking cars, devise new kinds of home appliances.
If they think that one brain can do that, they're deluded. Human brains do not work in isolation, they collude in many different ways. An idea today could be the indirect result of an unrelated (to most people) ideas from a century ago.
So let's hope that they've budgeted for several billion of these things, and a few hundred years before anything comes out of it.
It's actually cellar temperature rather than room temperature.
Dig a big hole in the ground (or use a nearby cave). Unlike room temperature, this tends to stay the same temperature all year round (without the need for heating or air-conditioning).
....python has equivalent functionality...but is actually readable and structured and while its OO system isn't perfect its a damn site better...
But I (and others) can write structured, OO code in Perl (while having non-OO code where it makes more sense)
And since I'm allowed to lay it out logically, rather than the structure being part of the logic, it is far more readable.
Perl allows you to think, which is why I'll continue to use it.
A few years back I had a VMware slice that was mis-behaving, and IT support reckoned that adding a second CPU might help.
That change left the/proc/cpuinfo file insisting that I had one Intel and one AMD processor in the system.
[It didn't fix the problem - nothing ever did. I had it shut-down after 2 years of persistent problems and no useful work. No-one ever did explain why it would totally freeze (system clock stationary) for 60*n seconds]
...will be in the bill? Politicians have a habit of rolling lots of things into one in bills, and you can only get all or nothing. This suggestion (seems to) make sense, so there must be something else in the plan that they are hoping to get through on the back of it.
Or am I just too cynical?
A few years back I had some VM systems that would totally freeze for n*60s (highest n I saw was 15). When it unfroze the system clock was n*60s slow - so it had been a total freeze.
I never did get any explanation.
Those VM systems never did any useful work.
VM systems have their place, but running such services is probably not it, for me.
The forbidder can always return a page to explain why the status code has been set.
But it's up to the browser whether it displays it, or whether it just display a standard error page.
e.g., IIRC IE6 would only display the returned info it if it was over 256(?) bytes in length.
Surely the use of anything affects the bairn?
It's called your environment.
At the age of a few hours I couldn't see or hear very well (and couldn't remember anything for very long, so those are assumptions). But my brain locked in to my environment and made sense of it. Why would it be surprising to anyone to think that it continues to do so, albeit at a less profound rate?
There are people who reckon they are useless at adding up. They can, however, multiple any 3 numbers from 1 to 20 by 1, 2 or 3, add them up and subtract the total from another number. They play darts. Their environment changed their brain to perform a function.
That's the point - MS Windows refers to the timezone as GMT - which it is not. GMT is always GMT. Europe/London (or GB) is BST in the summer (or, since this is the UK, the "summer months").
You, like MS, don't seem able to make the distinction.
>> "...computers would display Greenwich Mean Time,"
My Windows systems already half do this.
They get the time correct on Daylight Savings time, but insist on calling it GMT, which it isn't.
I can't stand icons either. I can read, and a name means something specific.
Mind you - I also have all of my desktop items (there are only a few - as I use the Start menu for occasional things) rolled into a menu on the toolbar (right next to the Start menu), as I have application windows covering the desktop (not full-screen either - another abomination), and so it's a most unhelpful place to put anything I might want to use.
I suppose that ability will have gone too?
And don't try to tell me it's for backwards compatibility.
I won't, as it obviously isn't.
You could get that by putting a thin, flat connector on the device and supplying a very short cable connecting that to a 3.5mm jack (socket) into which you could plug any existing 3.5mm plug.
Mind you that "thin, flat connector" could be what this patent is, except that Apple won't supply it and will expect some vast royalty if anyone tries to make one. Probably.
I hope you're not attributing effect to cause there. For a start, it's very difficult to buy PC hardware without a Microsoft OS already on it, since MS is free to bribe hardware suppliers.
Many of that 90% of corporations will also be using MacOS X, Solaris, Linux as well.
Well, I'd argue that the Developer should be the person who supports production *as well*.
No hand-over procedures
An incentive to get it right, and produce a self-maintaining system since you are responsible for the live version and really want it to look after itself so you can get on with *new* things.
But this is a view not approved of by people who reckon that documenting a procedure is the best way to make it work and who seem to be happy for the internalized knowledge gained during development to never reach the production environment. The result is lots of procedure and less actual results.
Versions X and Y of a DLL will be flat-out incompatible if that DLL is written in C++ and the author has changed the number of attributes in an interface class....
Why would any developer do that? Why not create a new class with the added bits, and make the old class use the new one, passing in default values for the additions. That is backwards compatibility.
And the fact that Microsoft is so good at preserving application backward compatibility
Not for 3rd-party application code (which is nothing to do with them), but for the Windows OS code used by applications. And, from what I've heard, a lot of the "difficulties" here have been because Microsoft has lots of undocumented calls (so that MS products can do things that others "can't") which then non-MS applications start to use in other ways. If MS did have a fully-documented OS interface there might be fewer "poor practices". So it's self-inflicted, I fear.
Slashdot Mirror
That was really a reference to the "world outside".
Three - all in their 20's now. And nothing pleased me more than when they worked out that something was "wrong" based on their own experiences, rather than me having to tell them so (at which point they often disagreed, and usually put up some good arguments for their views).
So I prefer to give general guidelines, let them know that I'll (try to) help with any problems then let them get on with it. They did things differently to how I would have done them, but it all worked for them, and I reckon they're the better for having their own experiential learning, rather than any proscriptive edicts from me.
Do you ban watching TV too? There's a huge percentage of trash there.
And what about the "world outside", or are they banned from there too?
At what point will they be allowed to learn?
If they think that one brain can do that, they're deluded. Human brains do not work in isolation, they collude in many different ways. An idea today could be the indirect result of an unrelated (to most people) ideas from a century ago.
So let's hope that they've budgeted for several billion of these things, and a few hundred years before anything comes out of it.
I've always known it as Button2.
And it's always been configurable as to what that does, just as all of the 9 buttons are in X (should you actually have a 9-button mouse).
So is this just about changing the default setting?
Could this be a result of them using design tools that mean they don't need to think - so they don't?
It's actually cellar temperature rather than room temperature. Dig a big hole in the ground (or use a nearby cave). Unlike room temperature, this tends to stay the same temperature all year round (without the need for heating or air-conditioning).
If they are "natural ways" they are presumably "obvious". And hence unpatentable?
Or am I just not thinking as someone trying to extract money for doing nothing?
But I (and others) can write structured, OO code in Perl (while having non-OO code where it makes more sense)
And since I'm allowed to lay it out logically, rather than the structure being part of the logic, it is far more readable.
Perl allows you to think, which is why I'll continue to use it.
That change left the /proc/cpuinfo file insisting that I had one Intel and one AMD processor in the system.
[It didn't fix the problem - nothing ever did. I had it shut-down after 2 years of persistent problems and no useful work. No-one ever did explain why it would totally freeze (system clock stationary) for 60*n seconds]
...will be in the bill? Politicians have a habit of rolling lots of things into one in bills, and you can only get all or nothing. This suggestion (seems to) make sense, so there must be something else in the plan that they are hoping to get through on the back of it.
Or am I just too cynical?
A few years back I had some VM systems that would totally freeze for n*60s (highest n I saw was 15). When it unfroze the system clock was n*60s slow - so it had been a total freeze.
I never did get any explanation.
Those VM systems never did any useful work.
VM systems have their place, but running such services is probably not it, for me.
The forbidder can always return a page to explain why the status code has been set. But it's up to the browser whether it displays it, or whether it just display a standard error page. e.g., IIRC IE6 would only display the returned info it if it was over 256(?) bytes in length.
They do in the UK.
Additional cost ~£2,000.
1 year saving (fuel and Road Fund Licence) ~£650.
ROI - ~33%.
Surely the use of anything affects the bairn? It's called your environment. At the age of a few hours I couldn't see or hear very well (and couldn't remember anything for very long, so those are assumptions). But my brain locked in to my environment and made sense of it. Why would it be surprising to anyone to think that it continues to do so, albeit at a less profound rate? There are people who reckon they are useless at adding up. They can, however, multiple any 3 numbers from 1 to 20 by 1, 2 or 3, add them up and subtract the total from another number. They play darts. Their environment changed their brain to perform a function.
No, I am making the distinction perfectly well, but perhaps I was not clear
You are not listening.
On Windows the timezone is listed as GMT+0 (as it is listed as GMT-5 for the New York).
Neither is correct. Hence my comment.
A logical timezone from the database in question is identified as something like "Europe/London" or "GB" (this happens to be a filename, wheee)
But not on Windows. vide ultra
And BST is always one hour offset from GMT, but for half of the year BST simply doesn't exist.
It always exists - it's just not active. There is a difference. "Wed Oct 19 23:26:25 BST 2011" is still valid, even when you read it on Christmas Day.
That's the point - MS Windows refers to the timezone as GMT - which it is not. GMT is always GMT. Europe/London (or GB) is BST in the summer (or, since this is the UK, the "summer months").
You, like MS, don't seem able to make the distinction.
>> "...computers would display Greenwich Mean Time,"
My Windows systems already half do this. They get the time correct on Daylight Savings time, but insist on calling it GMT, which it isn't.
I can't stand icons either. I can read, and a name means something specific.
Mind you - I also have all of my desktop items (there are only a few - as I use the Start menu for occasional things) rolled into a menu on the toolbar (right next to the Start menu), as I have application windows covering the desktop (not full-screen either - another abomination), and so it's a most unhelpful place to put anything I might want to use.
I suppose that ability will have gone too?
And don't try to tell me it's for backwards compatibility.
I won't, as it obviously isn't.
You could get that by putting a thin, flat connector on the device and supplying a very short cable connecting that to a 3.5mm jack (socket) into which you could plug any existing 3.5mm plug.
Mind you that "thin, flat connector" could be what this patent is, except that Apple won't supply it and will expect some vast royalty if anyone tries to make one. Probably.
But what if it's just the Aliens in those galaxies producing the stuff?
The sets I've seen come with glasses (usually 2 pairs) so you don't need to buy them separately to get the effect.
I hope you're not attributing effect to cause there. For a start, it's very difficult to buy PC hardware without a Microsoft OS already on it, since MS is free to bribe hardware suppliers. Many of that 90% of corporations will also be using MacOS X, Solaris, Linux as well.
Well, I'd argue that the Developer should be the person who supports production *as well*.
But this is a view not approved of by people who reckon that documenting a procedure is the best way to make it work and who seem to be happy for the internalized knowledge gained during development to never reach the production environment. The result is lots of procedure and less actual results.
It's still a FAT variant, which means that seeking in a file is an O(n) operation (it's O(log(n)) on most systems)
Irrelevant for SDXC, though. I can't see that seeking.
(from earlier)ISO-9660 doesn't support Unicode.
UDF does. But MS only allows that on an optical drive. (Format a hard-drive with UDF and XP is flummoxed). MS == no imagination.
Why would any developer do that? Why not create a new class with the added bits, and make the old class use the new one, passing in default values for the additions. That is backwards compatibility.
Not for 3rd-party application code (which is nothing to do with them), but for the Windows OS code used by applications. And, from what I've heard, a lot of the "difficulties" here have been because Microsoft has lots of undocumented calls (so that MS products can do things that others "can't") which then non-MS applications start to use in other ways. If MS did have a fully-documented OS interface there might be fewer "poor practices". So it's self-inflicted, I fear.