This is mixing two separate issues. Oil is not the problem as far as producing electricity, its coal. I disagree. The natural progression (in my opinion) is to move from combustible materials to voltaic ones. That means goodbye to oil, ethanol, and yes, fuel cells. If you move onto an electrical platform for transportation, the need for combustibles greatly diminishes, and the demand for efficient (and as you point out, environmentally friendly) means of producing electricity (ala nuclear, solar, wave, and wind plants) take their place.
technology decreases the barrier to entry for access to knowledge. No longer is it necessary to purchase a book or magazine to gain insight to the world around us. This increase in technology also produces another interesting effect: it also increases the specialization of knowledge. For example, cars used to be made such that anyone with a small degree of experience could fix and replace parts in his own car. Lately, this isn't the case. Technology has given way such that many problems require very specialized knowledge of how the engine compartment of a car is built because efficiencies in compacting it have been achieved.
Now, to get to your transmission requires a near disassembly of the entire hulking mass of the car. It now requires very specialized knowledge to do this whereas before, it just meant unbolting it from the engine block, unhooking a few items and your free.
The Internet isn't making us dumber, it just forces us to specialize our knowledge in order to compete in the market place of human intelligence and knowledge.
The only real responsibility of the Vice President is to inquire on the health of the President. In that position, Hillary might as well be the First Lady again.
that the government shouldn't be responsible for sustaining someone's broken business model. The market should decide what that model should be and if a business can't adapt to changing market conditions, it deserves to die.
There are myriad ways that the **AA can adapt to piracy, most of them involve earning less than when they had direct control over distribution, but such are the winds of change. There are many cost reducing alternatives that they can entertain (pun intended), so I'm not sure they have trimmed the fat necessary for me as the consumer to feel too bad for them.
How 'bout getting an interview with these guys? I think it would be the perfect opportunity for the **AA to put up or shut up with the community on their long term goals.
No need for ad hominem attacks, et all, but an opportunity to speak on an issue that is mostly one sided here on/.
First thing that comes to mind is validation. If you create middle ware that several apps consume, you may not have control over what they place in the list, but you sure can control how you handle things instead of outright cast something to an invalid object.
It's certainly more efficient to do an instanceof check than to catch a ClassCastException.
There are myriad test automation tools out there. One that I personally like (but is now out of business) was Agitar. Google them and you can also find the vultures looking to pick at its carcass...
DoE uses those networks as well. I did an internship with a DoE contractor and as part of my gig, created an internal informational site for the government contractors there consisting mostly of stuff pulled off of Wikipedia and other public sources to 'create awareness'. Fact of the matter is, the same 'tubes' used as the infrastructure for the public side and SIPRNet arethe same, just that everything is heavily encrypted.
True, but MediaPortal (Open Source DVR) is very international-centric and it ignores it. Another reason why I use it: Not necessarily because its open source, but because its user centric, not corporate centric.
The area responsible for involuntary mechanisms such the heart and breathing are controlled by the brain stem. Disabling the brain stem, however would have even more devastating effects because it is the conduit through which all motor activities take place such as walking, touch senses, and yes, even talking.
If you wanted to really screw someone up, the brain stem is where you want to do the damage.
Funny you mention this, but this document does have free (as in libre) access. You can go to any of their distribution centers and purchase a copy. You can go to any of their churches and make inquiries as to its contents.
The issue revolves around the church's copyright and right of distribution, not around 'they can't let the sheep know!'.
Yish, lengthy article, but good read nonetheless. Does intellisense really rot your mind? No. At least it doesn't any more than other code completers say, Eclipse. He talks about two approaches: Top-Down/Bottom-Up. I say I'm a little of both. First, find out what the backend needs and then design my interfaces and my input objects. Then it's only a matter of stubbing out the plumbing and then putting the meat on. Intellisense helps me worry about other things. Heaven forbid we all go back to the notepad days...
I'd love to, but because of security concerns, my employer doesn't allow cameras at work. However, I'd you'd like to try it for yourself, get two swivel mounts for a flat panel monitor, install, then with an nVidia (I'm sure ATI can do the same thing) card you can rotate the display 90 degrees.
Developing in Eclipse is especially satisfying because I can have all the perspective windows open and have *plenty* of code space left.
I do this. I have two widescreens tilted at 90 degrees so the I get not only really good vertical space for coding, but great horizontal space for many applications.
The keyboard, of all things, should be easy to swap out for a new one--it is after all the primary input device on the computer, and if you lose that, you lose the computer.
I find this to be an irritating trend, one that Apple seems to be taking the lead on. One of the things that computers brought to the table with the PC revolution was the concept of modularity. That if there was a problem with one modular component, it could be easily replaced with another and the whole was still good.
The principle applies to creating new components. As long as the new did what the old did (albeit in a more efficient way) it didn't matter because the components were designed against an interface--a common pattern in software development.
Let the keyboards, batteries, etceteras be modular!
Slashdot Mirror
technology decreases the barrier to entry for access to knowledge. No longer is it necessary to purchase a book or magazine to gain insight to the world around us. This increase in technology also produces another interesting effect: it also increases the specialization of knowledge. For example, cars used to be made such that anyone with a small degree of experience could fix and replace parts in his own car. Lately, this isn't the case. Technology has given way such that many problems require very specialized knowledge of how the engine compartment of a car is built because efficiencies in compacting it have been achieved.
Now, to get to your transmission requires a near disassembly of the entire hulking mass of the car. It now requires very specialized knowledge to do this whereas before, it just meant unbolting it from the engine block, unhooking a few items and your free.
The Internet isn't making us dumber, it just forces us to specialize our knowledge in order to compete in the market place of human intelligence and knowledge.
Oh no, the flash wear myth! Try this on.
The only real responsibility of the Vice President is to inquire on the health of the President. In that position, Hillary might as well be the First Lady again.
that the government shouldn't be responsible for sustaining someone's broken business model. The market should decide what that model should be and if a business can't adapt to changing market conditions, it deserves to die.
There are myriad ways that the **AA can adapt to piracy, most of them involve earning less than when they had direct control over distribution, but such are the winds of change. There are many cost reducing alternatives that they can entertain (pun intended), so I'm not sure they have trimmed the fat necessary for me as the consumer to feel too bad for them.
How 'bout getting an interview with these guys? I think it would be the perfect opportunity for the **AA to put up or shut up with the community on their long term goals.
/.
No need for ad hominem attacks, et all, but an opportunity to speak on an issue that is mostly one sided here on
First thing that comes to mind is validation. If you create middle ware that several apps consume, you may not have control over what they place in the list, but you sure can control how you handle things instead of outright cast something to an invalid object.
It's certainly more efficient to do an instanceof check than to catch a ClassCastException.
There are myriad test automation tools out there. One that I personally like (but is now out of business) was Agitar. Google them and you can also find the vultures looking to pick at its carcass...
ClassCastException and NPE are the easiest to avoid. With adequate unit testing, those are the easiest problems to find.
While Generics add a lot of protection by making your List strongly typed, using instanceof checks will protect your code when using a List.
DoE uses those networks as well. I did an internship with a DoE contractor and as part of my gig, created an internal informational site for the government contractors there consisting mostly of stuff pulled off of Wikipedia and other public sources to 'create awareness'. Fact of the matter is, the same 'tubes' used as the infrastructure for the public side and SIPRNet arethe same, just that everything is heavily encrypted.
My favorite site of destroying thing in unorthodox manners: Meet the Etherkiller.
True, but MediaPortal (Open Source DVR) is very international-centric and it ignores it. Another reason why I use it: Not necessarily because its open source, but because its user centric, not corporate centric.
The area responsible for involuntary mechanisms such the heart and breathing are controlled by the brain stem. Disabling the brain stem, however would have even more devastating effects because it is the conduit through which all motor activities take place such as walking, touch senses, and yes, even talking.
If you wanted to really screw someone up, the brain stem is where you want to do the damage.
Let me guess, Circle of Protection: Red?
Funny you mention this, but this document does have free (as in libre) access. You can go to any of their distribution centers and purchase a copy. You can go to any of their churches and make inquiries as to its contents. The issue revolves around the church's copyright and right of distribution, not around 'they can't let the sheep know!'.
In this edition, Armstrong shot first.
Yish, lengthy article, but good read nonetheless. Does intellisense really rot your mind? No. At least it doesn't any more than other code completers say, Eclipse. He talks about two approaches: Top-Down/Bottom-Up. I say I'm a little of both. First, find out what the backend needs and then design my interfaces and my input objects. Then it's only a matter of stubbing out the plumbing and then putting the meat on. Intellisense helps me worry about other things. Heaven forbid we all go back to the notepad days...
Or we could go back to trying to do nuclear powered aircraft. This image depicts a single prototype engine--its resting place is in southern Idaho.
I'd love to, but because of security concerns, my employer doesn't allow cameras at work. However, I'd you'd like to try it for yourself, get two swivel mounts for a flat panel monitor, install, then with an nVidia (I'm sure ATI can do the same thing) card you can rotate the display 90 degrees. Developing in Eclipse is especially satisfying because I can have all the perspective windows open and have *plenty* of code space left.
I do this. I have two widescreens tilted at 90 degrees so the I get not only really good vertical space for coding, but great horizontal space for many applications.
I find this to be an irritating trend, one that Apple seems to be taking the lead on. One of the things that computers brought to the table with the PC revolution was the concept of modularity. That if there was a problem with one modular component, it could be easily replaced with another and the whole was still good.
The principle applies to creating new components. As long as the new did what the old did (albeit in a more efficient way) it didn't matter because the components were designed against an interface--a common pattern in software development.
Let the keyboards, batteries, etceteras be modular!
To replace the pottery my kids accidentally smash...
is not working either. Lame.