I'm a software engineer, recent graduate, never heard of a B-Tree in my life. I would rather have a question about how to solve a problem. Explain object orientated programming and it's advantages, etc... Sounds like you are a Racecar Driver.
All LSI really produces nowadays is intellectual property.
Could someone please explain what that term means? Honestly, it get (ab)used all the time, and, for the life of me, I can't see any way of creating a definition that would have a chance in hell of ever being anything but ambiguous and self-contradictory.
OK. While I am not a big supporter of software patents, I have heard this argument one too many times; that there is something inherently contradictory about owning a thought or idea.
The idea of ownership in itself is not a natively obvious idea. The idea that you own the tools you hold in your hand or the food you produced is relatively simple, and obviously helps to avoid social conflicts. From there we progress to ownership of things I don't hold in my hand right now, or even things which I may not be able to defend.
Once you get to ownership of physical things which you did not create it gets a lot trickier. The native americans did not understand how one could own land. So the white man came and took it away. Today it is obvious that land can be owned; but it is also obvious that the public needs to be given rights to use the roads and public areas, to get around.
Something similar may be appropriate in the realm of software. Instead of stubbornly refusing to accept the corporation's concept of intellectual property, while in the meantime they go and patent obvious ideas (supported by the law), maybe we should be fighting to get the important parts of the intellectual ideosphere declared public, and lay claim to the other parts as the case may be.
I am not necessarily advocating this approach, my main point was merely to refute the argument that ideas could not be owned.
You should try the Answers.com Firefox extension or Windows plugin (for IE users). They let you alt+click on any word, or right-click to get a definition from the context menu, even without selecting the word.
If SPI is Debian's legal representative, it is perfectly reasonable for them to expect to be consulted about potentially problematic legal actions taken by Debian, let alone to simply be informed when such actions take place.
SPI wasn't trying to take the place of Debian's "governing body", it was simply trying to act as their legal representative.
So what ever happened to using the referrer string?
Sometimes the website wants to be able to track which links (from the same page, to the same page!) are getting clicked more often, in order to improve the user experience. A feature like this would help do this.
synchronizing threads over 4 cpu's definitely is a worse idea than having separate processes running, because the last ones don't have to interchange data all the time (they can but they don't have to).
Why do threads need to interchange data all the time? They can, but they don't have to. Processes can, as well, but it is much harder. It seems that anything cooperating processes can do, threads should be able to do, with less overhead. Am I wrong?
Re:Thats the whole point of the "puzzler"
on
Java Puzzlers
·
· Score: 1
I guess that when C was being designed, "character" was a more common term for the smallest data size on a computer than "byte".
Even stranger, is that in C the type of a character literal (e.g. 'A') is int - not char!
Re:Thats the whole point of the "puzzler"
on
Java Puzzlers
·
· Score: 1
Off topic, but is there any C that defines sizeof(char) != 1? I'd be interested to know.
By definition, in C, sizeof(char) == 1. However, theoretically, bytes don't have to be 8 bits long. Though I don't know of any modern machine with such bytes.
The problem with Java applets, is that they don't interact with the HTML of the page the way Javascript does. So my GUI has to be either ALL Java or ALL HTML. Whereas Javascript was designed up front to interact with the document DOM, and therefore it becomes easy to mix in to the web page.
Intuitively it seems that the NTM is more powerful than the DTM, since it can execute many possible computations in parallel, requiring only that one of them succeeds. Any computation carried out by a NTM can be simulated by a DTM, although it may require significantly longer time. How much longer is not known in general - this is, in a nutshell, the definition of the "Is P = NP?" problem (see Complexity classes P and NP).
This means that anything that a non-deterministic turing machine can do, a deterministic turing machine can simulate. Neither of them can generate random numbers.
Non-determinisim, in computational science, doesn't mean "we don't know what it'll do". It means something more like "we define several things that it will do, in a given state, and it does all of them in parallel" (imagine an imaginary machine splitting up into more imaginary machines, each of which follows one path).
Slashdot Mirror
Davidson wasn't the "victim" of a murder-suicide. He was the perpetrator of a murder-suicide. AKA, the murderer.
And here I thought that supernovae would be modeled by a supermodel.
OK. While I am not a big supporter of software patents, I have heard this argument one too many times; that there is something inherently contradictory about owning a thought or idea.
The idea of ownership in itself is not a natively obvious idea. The idea that you own the tools you hold in your hand or the food you produced is relatively simple, and obviously helps to avoid social conflicts. From there we progress to ownership of things I don't hold in my hand right now, or even things which I may not be able to defend.
Once you get to ownership of physical things which you did not create it gets a lot trickier. The native americans did not understand how one could own land. So the white man came and took it away. Today it is obvious that land can be owned; but it is also obvious that the public needs to be given rights to use the roads and public areas, to get around.
Something similar may be appropriate in the realm of software. Instead of stubbornly refusing to accept the corporation's concept of intellectual property, while in the meantime they go and patent obvious ideas (supported by the law), maybe we should be fighting to get the important parts of the intellectual ideosphere declared public, and lay claim to the other parts as the case may be.
I am not necessarily advocating this approach, my main point was merely to refute the argument that ideas could not be owned.
Actually, Mozilla has decided to keep most of the rendering upgrades waiting for Firefox 3. (See the Gecko branch plan).
Google?
You should try the Answers.com Firefox extension or Windows plugin (for IE users). They let you alt+click on any word, or right-click to get a definition from the context menu, even without selecting the word.
Disclaimer: I work for Answers.com.
Regards,
-- Avi
SPI wasn't trying to take the place of Debian's "governing body", it was simply trying to act as their legal representative.
I never use ESC - CTRL-[ works exactly the same.
That would be great, if PI were 3.1315...
Sometimes the website wants to be able to track which links (from the same page, to the same page!) are getting clicked more often, in order to improve the user experience. A feature like this would help do this.
Why do threads need to interchange data all the time? They can, but they don't have to. Processes can, as well, but it is much harder. It seems that anything cooperating processes can do, threads should be able to do, with less overhead. Am I wrong?
I guess that when C was being designed, "character" was a more common term for the smallest data size on a computer than "byte".
Even stranger, is that in C the type of a character literal (e.g. 'A') is int - not char!
By definition, in C, sizeof(char) == 1. However, theoretically, bytes don't have to be 8 bits long. Though I don't know of any modern machine with such bytes.
No, these people were generally fed by the town that they came to, in return for telling a story, news, or a song.
Why, oh why, do I never have mod points when I see something that is so clearly (+1 funny)??
The problem with Java applets, is that they don't interact with the HTML of the page the way Javascript does. So my GUI has to be either ALL Java or ALL HTML. Whereas Javascript was designed up front to interact with the document DOM, and therefore it becomes easy to mix in to the web page.
Monad is supposed to do this, in Longhorn; but it might be possible to get the beta version working with .NET.
From the Wikipedia article on Non-deterministic Turing Machines:
This means that anything that a non-deterministic turing machine can do, a deterministic turing machine can simulate. Neither of them can generate random numbers.
Non-determinisim, in computational science, doesn't mean "we don't know what it'll do". It means something more like "we define several things that it will do, in a given state, and it does all of them in parallel" (imagine an imaginary machine splitting up into more imaginary machines, each of which follows one path).
Perhaps you meant: Probabilistic Turing Machines, which can indeed "generate" random numbers.
No. In fact, a non-deterministic Turing machine is exactly equivalent in computational power to a deterministic one.
Also:
Philadelphia - City of Brotherly Love.