Mozilla in their 'wisdom' decided to disable the ESC key that a lot of people used to stop animated gifs running https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=614304/. It also stopped the page loading - dead in its tracks - which I personally loved. However some Mozilla devs didn't like it (as scripts etc may not be loaded properly). So they've now taken control away from the annoyed user who is going to cop entire page loads of crap.
Mod parent informative. These guys are nothing more than headhunters trying to pitch themselves at any top-notch dev that might come their way, but trying to play up how cool and Hollywood-movie-star the word 'Agent' sounds. Wow I even have visions of limos and red carpets wherever these smart devs go.
If they are such smart devs and techs themselves, why have they felt the need to get into marketing to make money?
Over on the Vintage Computer forum, people do in fact run old circuit boards such as PDP-11 modules through the dishwasher, and clean contacts with fine abrasive.
Blasting core memory stacks with compressed air however is a definate no-no as this destroys the fine wiring.
How would you feel if the drone, having malfunctioned, came down in a field and was found by a group of children, who being curious decide to play with it and set it off? Booby traps are despicable.
Back when I was doing freelance contracting in the early 90s I relied on it. Unix, Xenix, DOS, compiled it on a bunch of things. I could use it to talk to anything, I reckon with the right parameters it could talk to a broken toaster. It may not have been the fastest protocol around but it WORKED. I was sorry to see it closed up, and I'm sorry to see it go.
Oh how this is sooooo close to the mark, wish I had mod points. Like others I gave up reading JP's column. Well that's not quite true, I scanned it just to see who he would be name-dropping this month.
Steve Ciarcia's column, on the other hand... that guy was amazing. Not that I ever built any of his circuits, but he certainly added that technical grunt to the magazine.
...and it's my favourite single-player computer game, and at around 90kb it's not a glutton on disk space. Haven't been keeping up much with later developments, has there been much innovation since then?
In Jules Verne's 'Mysterious Island' he writes about how his castaways build a civilisation on a remote pacific island. One of the things they build is a telegraph from scratch. They also build paddle wheels, make guncotton, determine the latitude and longitude of their island, make a secure house out of a cave behind a waterfall, grow wheat from a single husk and a lot of other things. And as a bonus, it has the return of one of Verne's most famous characters (read it and find out who!).
This is one of my favourite books, I can definately recommend it to the whole slashdot crowd.
No problem. Your style is to string overly long sentences together with commas. There are five in the fourth sentence of your first paragraph alone. Doesn't that bug you?
Whilst hydraulics might sound like a good idea, remember the operating conditions it's working in - the mean surface temperature is -63C which could severely affect a hydraulic system
...and for the life of me, I don't know why, considering Spirit has shown how easy it is to get bogged even with autonomous ground-plotting software. The Lunar Rover mesh wheels worked perfectly, were lightweight and durable, why not do the same? Alternately, if I were in charge of wheel design I would perhaps consider a more spherical wheel cross-section. I recall something I saw whilst browsing Google Patents which was a 1930's swamp buggy machine that had spherical wheels. The softer the terrain the further it sank down, which in turn increased the ground contact area. Seemed like a good idea to me.
Exactly. Seeing the GPs query, the mesh tires were the first thing I thought of too. They worked on the low gravity and soft surface of the moon, can't see why they wouldn't work on Mars.
Wish I had mod points, parent is absolutely correct. Stop complaining and trying to find some panacea for your architecture problems. It seems you want to have something you can show your client 'There! it works on THAT browser!' instead of thinking about the common denominator. There's no way I'd be happy having to use not just a particular browser, but a particular version of that browser - who are you trying to kid? The client and the user, it seems. Sorry if this seems harsh but that's my opinion.
As with your locomotive example, WWII planes are at a technology level that can be rebuilt by dedicated enthusasists whereas post-war jet aircraft not so much. Reuilding a jet engine is so much more specialised.
I don't know if it's popular in the US but it is in the UK and Australia. It's a series of super-easy PIC controllers that are very cheap and programed in a version of BASIC though a serial port, no special programmer circuitry required. They have A to D inputs and servo control outputs. They are great for school projects and Silicon Chip magazine always has lots of project articles for them. See http://www.rev-ed.co.uk/picaxe/
Well he's at +5 already, but he has it spot on. When I talk to other programmers who can't see the value (or are lazy) in providing comments, I try to make it clear to them the comments are the RATIONALE for the piece of code. We know we can see a loop that iterates over a list, but why did Fred (who left before I started) write this module in the first place? He could have mentioned in a short blurb at the top that it updates a person's Mojo and that it's only used by the AustinPowers module, thus saving me time doing a global search on the thing. And given that I don't have any RATIONALE for Mojo.dll existing I sure as beans won't have any reference in AustinPowers saying the Mojo was moved into the YeahBaby common library because of some reason or other.
RATIONALE. The WHY of the code, as so neatly put by the op.
I would add to the parent's statement that bigger and more sophisticated printers yield more mechanical goodies that older printers, scanners and especially old office photocopiers have more mechanical 'guts' in them. As newer electronics became smarter the manufacturers could dispense with some of the moving parts (and why wouldn't they). A nice secondary use for the glass from an old photocopier is that being optically flat, they make a perfect surface plate for model engineering use, thus saving over $100 on a machined steel or granite one.
Part of me agrees with this offhand statement. As someone who used to write C++ COM objects for banking risk management, I can honestly say COM is short for COMplex and COMplicated rather than Component Object Model. Table of vectors for function calls? Simple idea, terrible implementation. I spent more time doing the stupid COM plumbing then actually writing code that benefited the customer. And Don Box waxing lyrical about how wonderful and cool COM was in his book(s) just made me want to smack him in the face with a half-rotten tomato. At least one of the good things about.NET is that is works very well with legacy MS code, COM objects included.
Why go for the high-tech solution?
This link describes 'Quake Safe' which was developed by an engineering graduate http://www.abc.net.au/tv/newinventors/txt/s1794024.htm
shows that simple bamboo and wire wrapping can protect buildings in earthquake zones, a lot of those being in Asia where bamboo is cheap and readily available.
Slashdot Mirror
Mozilla in their 'wisdom' decided to disable the ESC key that a lot of people used to stop animated gifs running https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=614304/. It also stopped the page loading - dead in its tracks - which I personally loved. However some Mozilla devs didn't like it (as scripts etc may not be loaded properly). So they've now taken control away from the annoyed user who is going to cop entire page loads of crap.
Mod parent informative. These guys are nothing more than headhunters trying to pitch themselves at any top-notch dev that might come their way, but trying to play up how cool and Hollywood-movie-star the word 'Agent' sounds. Wow I even have visions of limos and red carpets wherever these smart devs go. If they are such smart devs and techs themselves, why have they felt the need to get into marketing to make money?
Over on the Vintage Computer forum, people do in fact run old circuit boards such as PDP-11 modules through the dishwasher, and clean contacts with fine abrasive. Blasting core memory stacks with compressed air however is a definate no-no as this destroys the fine wiring.
How would you feel if the drone, having malfunctioned, came down in a field and was found by a group of children, who being curious decide to play with it and set it off? Booby traps are despicable.
Announced 1985, released 1988.
Back when I was doing freelance contracting in the early 90s I relied on it. Unix, Xenix, DOS, compiled it on a bunch of things. I could use it to talk to anything, I reckon with the right parameters it could talk to a broken toaster. It may not have been the fastest protocol around but it WORKED. I was sorry to see it closed up, and I'm sorry to see it go.
Steve Ciarcia's column, on the other hand... that guy was amazing. Not that I ever built any of his circuits, but he certainly added that technical grunt to the magazine.
...and it's my favourite single-player computer game, and at around 90kb it's not a glutton on disk space. Haven't been keeping up much with later developments, has there been much innovation since then?
According to wikipedia Congreve rockets were invented in 1804, so Doc could have used these.
In Jules Verne's 'Mysterious Island' he writes about how his castaways build a civilisation on a remote pacific island. One of the things they build is a telegraph from scratch. They also build paddle wheels, make guncotton, determine the latitude and longitude of their island, make a secure house out of a cave behind a waterfall, grow wheat from a single husk and a lot of other things. And as a bonus, it has the return of one of Verne's most famous characters (read it and find out who!). This is one of my favourite books, I can definately recommend it to the whole slashdot crowd.
No problem. Your style is to string overly long sentences together with commas. There are five in the fourth sentence of your first paragraph alone. Doesn't that bug you?
Whilst hydraulics might sound like a good idea, remember the operating conditions it's working in - the mean surface temperature is -63C which could severely affect a hydraulic system
...and for the life of me, I don't know why, considering Spirit has shown how easy it is to get bogged even with autonomous ground-plotting software. The Lunar Rover mesh wheels worked perfectly, were lightweight and durable, why not do the same? Alternately, if I were in charge of wheel design I would perhaps consider a more spherical wheel cross-section. I recall something I saw whilst browsing Google Patents which was a 1930's swamp buggy machine that had spherical wheels. The softer the terrain the further it sank down, which in turn increased the ground contact area. Seemed like a good idea to me.
Exactly. Seeing the GPs query, the mesh tires were the first thing I thought of too. They worked on the low gravity and soft surface of the moon, can't see why they wouldn't work on Mars.
This article on Hackaday late last year is about a project to make Homebrew Kodachrome: http://hackaday.com/2009/12/08/homebrew-kodachrome/
I use StrokeIt and do a quick right-left swish, you insensitive clod!
Wish I had mod points, parent is absolutely correct. Stop complaining and trying to find some panacea for your architecture problems. It seems you want to have something you can show your client 'There! it works on THAT browser!' instead of thinking about the common denominator. There's no way I'd be happy having to use not just a particular browser, but a particular version of that browser - who are you trying to kid? The client and the user, it seems. Sorry if this seems harsh but that's my opinion.
...one molecule ought to be enough for anybody!
As with your locomotive example, WWII planes are at a technology level that can be rebuilt by dedicated enthusasists whereas post-war jet aircraft not so much. Reuilding a jet engine is so much more specialised.
I don't know if it's popular in the US but it is in the UK and Australia. It's a series of super-easy PIC controllers that are very cheap and programed in a version of BASIC though a serial port, no special programmer circuitry required. They have A to D inputs and servo control outputs. They are great for school projects and Silicon Chip magazine always has lots of project articles for them. See http://www.rev-ed.co.uk/picaxe/
Well he's at +5 already, but he has it spot on.
When I talk to other programmers who can't see the value (or are lazy) in providing comments, I try to make it clear to them the comments are the RATIONALE for the piece of code. We know we can see a loop that iterates over a list, but why did Fred (who left before I started) write this module in the first place? He could have mentioned in a short blurb at the top that it updates a person's Mojo and that it's only used by the AustinPowers module, thus saving me time doing a global search on the thing. And given that I don't have any RATIONALE for Mojo.dll existing I sure as beans won't have any reference in AustinPowers saying the Mojo was moved into the YeahBaby common library because of some reason or other.
RATIONALE. The WHY of the code, as so neatly put by the op.
I would add to the parent's statement that bigger and more sophisticated printers yield more mechanical goodies that older printers, scanners and especially old office photocopiers have more mechanical 'guts' in them. As newer electronics became smarter the manufacturers could dispense with some of the moving parts (and why wouldn't they). A nice secondary use for the glass from an old photocopier is that being optically flat, they make a perfect surface plate for model engineering use, thus saving over $100 on a machined steel or granite one.
Part of me agrees with this offhand statement. As someone who used to write C++ COM objects for banking risk management, I can honestly say COM is short for COMplex and COMplicated rather than Component Object Model. Table of vectors for function calls? Simple idea, terrible implementation. I spent more time doing the stupid COM plumbing then actually writing code that benefited the customer. And Don Box waxing lyrical about how wonderful and cool COM was in his book(s) just made me want to smack him in the face with a half-rotten tomato. At least one of the good things about .NET is that is works very well with legacy MS code, COM objects included.
Why go for the high-tech solution? This link describes 'Quake Safe' which was developed by an engineering graduate http://www.abc.net.au/tv/newinventors/txt/s1794024.htm shows that simple bamboo and wire wrapping can protect buildings in earthquake zones, a lot of those being in Asia where bamboo is cheap and readily available.
But without the need for BIG RAT.