Military computers are normally highly secured, and I imagine these ballots will be being transmitted via the militarys own internal email, not over the public internet.
It would be no less secure than your own internal email - the email doesn't go out to the internt so it is as secure as your own private network is, which in the mili9tarys case is likely very secure.
Actually, it doesn't. However far apart those pennies are when you set up the communications, the "remote half" had to travel at most the speed of light to get there. So, you do not get any increase in the total communication speed.
I am just a layperson, but this argument makes no sense.
Lets say that the remote objects did indeed travel at C to get to some insanely remote location, and we indeed had agreen on a rate of 1 penny / second is a 0 bit, 2 pennies / second is 1 bit.
You are right i that the first set of information transmitted would not violate the faster than light law, since they traveled at light speed to get there. But wouldn't the information rate over time achived by these entangled particles actually violate the law? Or can you only measure entangled particles once before they become untangled?
Showing a graph of 3 months is worthless, since this whole thing has been going on for years now. If you look at the 2 year chart, you will see that they still have quite a bit to dip before they even hit the low point.
The only thing I'm missing at this point is the lovely font unification that Gnome has. (At least under 2.6.0-2 and XOrg, I didn't have to do any configuration to get pretty, aliased, unified fonts.
I have never ever had to do anything special to get anti-aliased fonts, but I use Gentoo and thus my QT and KDE is always built from source. This is probably a packaging problem with you distro.
The real test will be when I want to make sure that Firefox is the default URL handler so I don't have to deal with that damn Konqueror opening if I don't want to
Couldn't be easier. KControl -> KDE Components -> Component Chooser. Here you can set your default web browser, IM client, EMail client, etc.
Some of his posts are grossly incorrect. Examples:
But the semantics for many programs would not be correct, since Java requires array bounds checking. Disabling it means that you're not compiling Java.
True, if youe xceed the bounds of an array in a Java app you will get an array out of bounds exception - but that is the worst that can happen, a nasty error message. However, this is a totally different can of worms in C/C++. If you don't check the bounds of every single array, you could be exposing buffer overlows in your application, which is a huge security hole. +1 for Java.
You've posted three examples of code that you claimed was as fast or
faster in Java than in C++, and every one of them, when compiled
properly, turned out to be faster in C++ than in Java.
Faster when run how many iterations under hotspot? 1? 10? 100?
In Java you have to write nine copies of the basic sort function: one for arrays of chars, one for arrays of doubles, one for arrays of Objects, etc.
For one, most people use the Collection or List interfaces for utility classes so that you can pass in any type of object, be it an ArrayList or a linked list, so in the Real World(tm) this is rarely an issue. Additionally, Java 1.5 has templates so it is a moot point.
I could go on and debunk more of his debunking, but I can tell from his posts that ihe is quite biased and is not being resonable. Just for reference, I am *not* a Java developer. I write a lot of C++ code and a lot of java code, both are ideal for certain situations. For example, desktop apps with need for a fast startup time will always be best written in C++ until Java Vms are built into the OS. But for long-running business applications, where startup time is not a huge requirement and ease of development, debugging, and security are a higher priority, Java wins hands down.
Disregarding the about 35 syntax errors in your example, if it is doing what I think it is doing ( and because of the errors I cannot be exactly sure what you mean), this is no different from using the Object superclass in Java.
Object inJava is like void* in C/C++. Every class inherits from Object so you can cast to and from it when you need to pass around generic pointers.
The Java version of what i think you meant:
public class A {
public void doStuff()
{
System.out.println("A::doStuff()");
} }
public class B extends A {
public void doStuff()
{
System.out.println("B::doStuff()");
} }
public static void main( String[] args ) {
A a = new A();
B b = new B();
Object c = (Object)new B();
The number of mis-informed posts on this subject is staggaring. An attempt to debunk some of them:
Java is slow - This is a myth. A long-running Java app running under HotSpot will over time grow to be faster than nearly any simmilar C or C++ app. Why? Because the Vm can over time learn how the codepath actually is executing and optimize it at the assembly level. The only way you could consistantly achive performance as good would be to hand-code the whole app in assembly, and thati s assuming you already know in advance exactly how the program will be used so you know what paths to optimize. This is highly unlikely.
Java UIs are slow - Java UIs are only as slow as your toolkit. Yes, Swing blows ass. But there are Java bindings for Gtk, Qt, and wxWindows, all of which are pretty cross-platform. And there is also the SWT toolkit from IBM which uses native widgets when possible, and when not falls back on its own widgets.
Java needs a VM so you can't run it everywhere - THis has to be the dumbest one of all. Since when can you write any resonably complex C or C++ application for multiple platforms without some effort? Any C/C++ app targetting anything more than basic POSIX will be littered with #ifdefs everywhere. With Java at least you can complile it just once, then ship multiple VMs , rather than having to adust your code and re-compile for every target platform.
All the privacy nuts who go on and on about this stuff drive me insane. It is like they have neve rshopped anywhere in the past 10 years.
Whenever you buy something the cashier basically *has* to swipe it over ahigh frequency magnetic / EM emitter device to nuke the anti-shoplifiting chips they have. If they forget to do this the instant you walk out the door alarms blare etc.
Even *if* the manufacturer had RFID chips in their items seperate from the stores anti-theft tags, said chips would also be permenantly nuked by the device.
Aside fromt hat fact, you even said yourself they need to be within 2 or 3 *meters* to read the damn thing. How usefull is that to track *anyone*?
Throw your tinfoil hat in the trash, it doesn't belong here.
Seriously, I just can't understand this kind of thinking, although I encounter it all the time. If you're writing utilities for yourself or for a group of people very much like yourself, it's no problem. But if you're writing commercial software, you're not writing for yourself. Your whole livelihood revolves around solving other people's problems.
This statement is in no way contrary to the parent poster. In most medium to large scale enterprises, there are *always* product management teams and UI designers who hash out all aspects of the UI before the coders even start their work. It is these people who have the say in how the app looks, *not* the developer. The developer's job is to make the nice mock-ups work as expected.
Over $1000 means you can guarantee that everyone will pirate it without even feeling bad ("At that price, I didn't count as a potential customer anyway").
This is pretty much nonsense coming from someone with no experience in corperate purchasing. Have you ever tried to buy a license for a deploymenty of HP OpenView products for example?
Large companies will pay multiple thousands of dollars for software (and I mean *1* license, not many licenses). As long as your product is good and does what it says it is going to do, and they want that functionality, this is not much of an issue.
You are comparing ignorance of regional districts *within* a country (states) to ignorance of major world countries as a whole.
Europeans not knowing where Florida is is a totally different thing to Americans not knowing where Sweeden is. One os a district, the other is a country.
If you think Europeans should know where Florida is, then that means that Americans should know where South Wales is in the UK. Good luck on *that*.
It is pretty much accepted knowledge worldwide that the vast majority of the US population has little concern with anything beyond its own borders. Just watch your average american 6'oclock newscast and count the international references. Compared to other countries' newscasts it should be embarassing.
"There are only two backing plate slots for expansion cards and they are both occupied. One is filled by the graphics card ? an ATI Radeon 9600XT with D-SUB and DVI connectors, while the other is filled with a digital TV tuner card."
"Hiding under the CPU heatsink was a 2.6GHz Pentium 4, but Hush has now dropped this chip from its range and will be offering a 2.8GHz Pentium 4 instead."
Is a 9600 vs. a 9800 and a 2.8 vs. a 3.2 really that big a deal? Hell you could probably swap them out and it would still work fine.
The truth is that even the 802.11b connection is faster than high speed brodband to the home, so there is no real gain in using 802.11g.
No real gain?
How about sharing files between computers? How about being able to buy a $200 gadget at your nearest electronics store that hooks up to your TV and lets you stream movies over the wireless?
Home networking is here to stay. I know people who don't have two clues about computers, yet they have home networks and like to transfer files quickly. And the faster the protocol's bandwidth is, the more you will have per shared node if you have multiple wireless devices in the house.
Stop throwing around generalities in an attempt to build a straw man.
In College, the smart women were all math majors.
In what College? When? Have any numbers? There were hardly any female mathematicians at my University, the ratio was around 85% men to 15% women.
I ten to agree with the other posters - despite what everyone would like to believe, man and women *are* different. They like different things. For some stimuli different areas of a mans brain react than a woman. It is a fact that men and women's brains have evolved differently over the ages. We simply do not know enough about the brain to speculate at this point whether on average one brain is more optimized to certain types of tasks than another, although evidence would support this (women's communications centres are larger, men's spatial-relationship centres are larger).
SO, given all this uncertainty, how about instead of trying to exert undue pressure on one gender to fill a certian role, we just let people do what they want to do?. I would never, ever, ever become a PR consultant. I can't stand the type of work it is ( running aorund, chatting it up with people, lying for a living). However, that does not mean that I hold PR people in a low regard or that I do not respect their intelligence, to the contrary, they're some of the smartest people around I wager (look at the shit they get us to buy!).
So why can't the same be said of women? Why is it if a woman does not want to enter a science or computer sicence field they are being discriminated against?
Sun sued Microsoft for its use of their corrupted non-Sun JVM. Then Microsoft counter-sued Sun for technologies in Java that are patented by Microsoft.
Of course then Sun counter-counter-sued for technologies in.Net that they have patened.
They end dup reaching a settlement where Microsoft paid out some money and now they both get free unlimited use of each-other's patent portfolio.
Based on the definition of "Slashdot Fanboy", however, I would probably say "no". At least not in this "community".
Those who really care know software patents are bad, period, no matter what company is being hurt by them in the news. But to many/. people just the idea that Microsoft is hurting will cause them to turn a blind eye to the larger issue - that this could set a precedant that would hurt other software companies, and open source, in the long run.
You cannot have both a free society and be free from terrorist attacks. It is impossible. The more "security" you add the more Orwellian your government becomes.
A balence must be struck. And IMO it should be struck further toward "freedom" than it is being currently.
Some food for thought:
Dorothy Thompson:
"When liberty is taken away by force it can be restored by force. When it is relinquished voluntarily by default it can never be recovered."
John Adams:
"There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty."
Wendell Phillips:
"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."
And the ever popular Benjamin Franklin:
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security"
And just because someone works for an IT company does not mean they are not stupid.
Signing something you have not read is stupid.
Signing something you did read, yet you do not agree with is even more stupid.
Breaking a contract you signed and not expecting the other party to enforce their end of the contract is even more stupid than that.
Personally, I hope they take this guy for all he is worth. Hopefully that will get people to start reading these contracts and complaining when they do not agree with the terms.
As much as I don't think so it is nothing more or less evil then companies patenting every single thought their employees come up with.
Of course it is. It is a well established legal truth that what you do on company time is property of the company. This *includes* any ideas you come up with on company time.
Now of course this is difficult to impossible to enforce (if I patent an invention then how does the company know if I came up with it at night or during the daytime?), which is why most companies nowadays include in their employment agreement the stipulation that any inventions created while you are under the employ of the company, period, are property of the company.
However, it is important to remember that the person responsible for hiring you is usually more flexable than you think in this regard - if you highlight the terms you have problems with you can likely have them changed before you sign - I have done this in both my last two jobs without issue. If they want you for the job, they will bed a little, otherwise, you probably don't want to work there anyways since you'd be treated as nothing more than a cog in the machine.
The simple fact of the matter is, you signed the agreement. If you did not agree with its terms at the time then you should not have signed it. I have no sympathy for anyone who signs things without reading them, it is just idiodic.
Argh.
The deal was a result of the patent lawsuit Sun undertook. This was all in the news months ago. Sun sued MS for it's Java corruption, the MS sued Sun for patent infringement, then Sun countersued with its own patent infringement.
Please research more. Thanks.
Slashdot Mirror
I would use this system without concern.
Military computers are normally highly secured, and I imagine these ballots will be being transmitted via the militarys own internal email, not over the public internet.
It would be no less secure than your own internal email - the email doesn't go out to the internt so it is as secure as your own private network is, which in the mili9tarys case is likely very secure.
Actually, it doesn't. However far apart those pennies are when you set up the communications, the "remote half" had to travel at most the speed of light to get there. So, you do not get any increase in the total communication speed.
I am just a layperson, but this argument makes no sense.
Lets say that the remote objects did indeed travel at C to get to some insanely remote location, and we indeed had agreen on a rate of 1 penny / second is a 0 bit, 2 pennies / second is 1 bit.
You are right i that the first set of information transmitted would not violate the faster than light law, since they traveled at light speed to get there. But wouldn't the information rate over time achived by these entangled particles actually violate the law? Or can you only measure entangled particles once before they become untangled?
Showing a graph of 3 months is worthless, since this whole thing has been going on for years now. If you look at the 2 year chart, you will see that they still have quite a bit to dip before they even hit the low point.
KControl -> Perephrials -> Keyboard -> Rate
.bash settings. Have you filed this bug at bugs.kde.org?
Mine is currently sert at 25 / s.
Though it should be inheriting from your
The only thing I'm missing at this point is the lovely font unification that Gnome has. (At least under 2.6.0-2 and XOrg, I didn't have to do any configuration to get pretty, aliased, unified fonts.
I have never ever had to do anything special to get anti-aliased fonts, but I use Gentoo and thus my QT and KDE is always built from source. This is probably a packaging problem with you distro.
The real test will be when I want to make sure that Firefox is the default URL handler so I don't have to deal with that damn Konqueror opening if I don't want to
Couldn't be easier. KControl -> KDE Components -> Component Chooser. Here you can set your default web browser, IM client, EMail client, etc.
Some of his posts are grossly incorrect. Examples:
But the semantics for many programs would not be correct, since Java requires array bounds checking. Disabling it means that you're not compiling Java.
True, if youe xceed the bounds of an array in a Java app you will get an array out of bounds exception - but that is the worst that can happen, a nasty error message. However, this is a totally different can of worms in C/C++. If you don't check the bounds of every single array, you could be exposing buffer overlows in your application, which is a huge security hole. +1 for Java.
You've posted three examples of code that you claimed was as fast or faster in Java than in C++, and every one of them, when compiled properly, turned out to be faster in C++ than in Java.
Faster when run how many iterations under hotspot? 1? 10? 100?
In Java you have to write nine copies of the basic sort function: one for arrays of chars, one for arrays of doubles, one for arrays of Objects, etc.
For one, most people use the Collection or List interfaces for utility classes so that you can pass in any type of object, be it an ArrayList or a linked list, so in the Real World(tm) this is rarely an issue. Additionally, Java 1.5 has templates so it is a moot point.
I could go on and debunk more of his debunking, but I can tell from his posts that ihe is quite biased and is not being resonable. Just for reference, I am *not* a Java developer. I write a lot of C++ code and a lot of java code, both are ideal for certain situations. For example, desktop apps with need for a fast startup time will always be best written in C++ until Java Vms are built into the OS. But for long-running business applications, where startup time is not a huge requirement and ease of development, debugging, and security are a higher priority, Java wins hands down.
Disregarding the about 35 syntax errors in your example, if it is doing what I think it is doing ( and because of the errors I cannot be exactly sure what you mean), this is no different from using the Object superclass in Java.
Object inJava is like void* in C/C++. Every class inherits from Object so you can cast to and from it when you need to pass around generic pointers.
The Java version of what i think you meant:
public class A
{
public void doStuff()
{
System.out.println("A::doStuff()");
}
}
public class B extends A
{
public void doStuff()
{
System.out.println("B::doStuff()");
}
}
public static void main( String[] args )
{
A a = new A();
B b = new B();
Object c = (Object)new B();
a.doStuff();
b.doStuff();
((B)c).doStuff();
}
The number of mis-informed posts on this subject is staggaring. An attempt to debunk some of them:
Java is slow - This is a myth. A long-running Java app running under HotSpot will over time grow to be faster than nearly any simmilar C or C++ app. Why? Because the Vm can over time learn how the codepath actually is executing and optimize it at the assembly level. The only way you could consistantly achive performance as good would be to hand-code the whole app in assembly, and thati s assuming you already know in advance exactly how the program will be used so you know what paths to optimize. This is highly unlikely.
Java UIs are slow - Java UIs are only as slow as your toolkit. Yes, Swing blows ass. But there are Java bindings for Gtk, Qt, and wxWindows, all of which are pretty cross-platform. And there is also the SWT toolkit from IBM which uses native widgets when possible, and when not falls back on its own widgets.
Java needs a VM so you can't run it everywhere - THis has to be the dumbest one of all. Since when can you write any resonably complex C or C++ application for multiple platforms without some effort? Any C/C++ app targetting anything more than basic POSIX will be littered with #ifdefs everywhere. With Java at least you can complile it just once, then ship multiple VMs , rather than having to adust your code and re-compile for every target platform.
All the privacy nuts who go on and on about this stuff drive me insane. It is like they have neve rshopped anywhere in the past 10 years.
Whenever you buy something the cashier basically *has* to swipe it over ahigh frequency magnetic / EM emitter device to nuke the anti-shoplifiting chips they have. If they forget to do this the instant you walk out the door alarms blare etc.
Even *if* the manufacturer had RFID chips in their items seperate from the stores anti-theft tags, said chips would also be permenantly nuked by the device.
Aside fromt hat fact, you even said yourself they need to be within 2 or 3 *meters* to read the damn thing. How usefull is that to track *anyone*?
Throw your tinfoil hat in the trash, it doesn't belong here.
Seriously, I just can't understand this kind of thinking, although I encounter it all the time. If you're writing utilities for yourself or for a group of people very much like yourself, it's no problem. But if you're writing commercial software, you're not writing for yourself. Your whole livelihood revolves around solving other people's problems.
This statement is in no way contrary to the parent poster. In most medium to large scale enterprises, there are *always* product management teams and UI designers who hash out all aspects of the UI before the coders even start their work. It is these people who have the say in how the app looks, *not* the developer. The developer's job is to make the nice mock-ups work as expected.
Over $1000 means you can guarantee that everyone will pirate it without even feeling bad ("At that price, I didn't count as a potential customer anyway").
This is pretty much nonsense coming from someone with no experience in corperate purchasing. Have you ever tried to buy a license for a deploymenty of HP OpenView products for example?
Large companies will pay multiple thousands of dollars for software (and I mean *1* license, not many licenses). As long as your product is good and does what it says it is going to do, and they want that functionality, this is not much of an issue.
Think about this for a second.
You are comparing ignorance of regional districts *within* a country (states) to ignorance of major world countries as a whole.
Europeans not knowing where Florida is is a totally different thing to Americans not knowing where Sweeden is. One os a district, the other is a country.
If you think Europeans should know where Florida is, then that means that Americans should know where South Wales is in the UK. Good luck on *that*.
It is pretty much accepted knowledge worldwide that the vast majority of the US population has little concern with anything beyond its own borders. Just watch your average american 6'oclock newscast and count the international references. Compared to other countries' newscasts it should be embarassing.
Does anyone read the articles anymore???
"There are only two backing plate slots for expansion cards and they are both occupied. One is filled by the graphics card ? an ATI Radeon 9600XT with D-SUB and DVI connectors, while the other is filled with a digital TV tuner card."
"Hiding under the CPU heatsink was a 2.6GHz Pentium 4, but Hush has now dropped this chip from its range and will be offering a 2.8GHz Pentium 4 instead."
Is a 9600 vs. a 9800 and a 2.8 vs. a 3.2 really that big a deal? Hell you could probably swap them out and it would still work fine.
The truth is that even the 802.11b connection is faster than high speed brodband to the home, so there is no real gain in using 802.11g.
No real gain?
How about sharing files between computers? How about being able to buy a $200 gadget at your nearest electronics store that hooks up to your TV and lets you stream movies over the wireless?
Home networking is here to stay. I know people who don't have two clues about computers, yet they have home networks and like to transfer files quickly. And the faster the protocol's bandwidth is, the more you will have per shared node if you have multiple wireless devices in the house.
Think outside the internet box.
Stop throwing around generalities in an attempt to build a straw man.
In College, the smart women were all math majors.
In what College? When? Have any numbers? There were hardly any female mathematicians at my University, the ratio was around 85% men to 15% women.
I ten to agree with the other posters - despite what everyone would like to believe, man and women *are* different. They like different things. For some stimuli different areas of a mans brain react than a woman. It is a fact that men and women's brains have evolved differently over the ages. We simply do not know enough about the brain to speculate at this point whether on average one brain is more optimized to certain types of tasks than another, although evidence would support this (women's communications centres are larger, men's spatial-relationship centres are larger).
SO, given all this uncertainty, how about instead of trying to exert undue pressure on one gender to fill a certian role, we just let people do what they want to do?. I would never, ever, ever become a PR consultant. I can't stand the type of work it is ( running aorund, chatting it up with people, lying for a living). However, that does not mean that I hold PR people in a low regard or that I do not respect their intelligence, to the contrary, they're some of the smartest people around I wager (look at the shit they get us to buy!).
So why can't the same be said of women? Why is it if a woman does not want to enter a science or computer sicence field they are being discriminated against?
One in recent memory was the Sun case.
.Net that they have patened.
Sun sued Microsoft for its use of their corrupted non-Sun JVM. Then Microsoft counter-sued Sun for technologies in Java that are patented by Microsoft.
Of course then Sun counter-counter-sued for technologies in
They end dup reaching a settlement where Microsoft paid out some money and now they both get free unlimited use of each-other's patent portfolio.
Microsoft has a long history of seldom using patents as an offensive measure, and only resorting to them in defence when another company sues *them*.
There are any number of patents Microsoft could be using to try and hurt Linux right now. Have you heard of any lawsuits? I haven't.
I would have to say YES.
Based on the definition of "Slashdot Fanboy", however, I would probably say "no". At least not in this "community".
Those who really care know software patents are bad, period, no matter what company is being hurt by them in the news. But to many /. people just the idea that Microsoft is hurting will cause them to turn a blind eye to the larger issue - that this could set a precedant that would hurt other software companies, and open source, in the long run.
Try running Klipper (under Utilities in the K menu). If you tell it to it will keep the clipboards synchronized.
It also has lots of other handy things, like clipboard history.
Main Entry: terrorism
Pronunciation: 'ter-&r-"i-z&m
Function: noun
: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion
Propeganda? WTF?
Of course the defined goal of terror is to instill terror. Its the f*cking definition of the word.
You can debate whether or not a given person is a terrorist, but you can't debate what a terrorist is.
You cannot have both a free society and be free from terrorist attacks. It is impossible. The more "security" you add the more Orwellian your government becomes.
A balence must be struck. And IMO it should be struck further toward "freedom" than it is being currently.
Some food for thought:
Dorothy Thompson:
"When liberty is taken away by force it can be restored by force. When it is relinquished voluntarily by default it can never be recovered."
John Adams:
"There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty."
Wendell Phillips:
"Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."
And the ever popular Benjamin Franklin:
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security"
And just because someone works for an IT company does not mean they are not stupid.
Signing something you have not read is stupid.
Signing something you did read, yet you do not agree with is even more stupid.
Breaking a contract you signed and not expecting the other party to enforce their end of the contract is even more stupid than that.
Personally, I hope they take this guy for all he is worth. Hopefully that will get people to start reading these contracts and complaining when they do not agree with the terms.
As much as I don't think so it is nothing more or less evil then companies patenting every single thought their employees come up with.
Of course it is. It is a well established legal truth that what you do on company time is property of the company. This *includes* any ideas you come up with on company time.
Now of course this is difficult to impossible to enforce (if I patent an invention then how does the company know if I came up with it at night or during the daytime?), which is why most companies nowadays include in their employment agreement the stipulation that any inventions created while you are under the employ of the company, period, are property of the company.
However, it is important to remember that the person responsible for hiring you is usually more flexable than you think in this regard - if you highlight the terms you have problems with you can likely have them changed before you sign - I have done this in both my last two jobs without issue. If they want you for the job, they will bed a little, otherwise, you probably don't want to work there anyways since you'd be treated as nothing more than a cog in the machine.
The simple fact of the matter is, you signed the agreement. If you did not agree with its terms at the time then you should not have signed it. I have no sympathy for anyone who signs things without reading them, it is just idiodic.
Argh. The deal was a result of the patent lawsuit Sun undertook. This was all in the news months ago. Sun sued MS for it's Java corruption, the MS sued Sun for patent infringement, then Sun countersued with its own patent infringement. Please research more. Thanks.
http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1104_2-5188012.html
I googled for "Sun microsoft patents". First hit.
You should probaby look at this as well:
http://meh.ogreboy.org/google.gif