Your post reads like a bit of an exaggeration. When it came to doing business in my neighborhood, the Lower East Side, business was good.
The bodegas sold and kept selling all goods they had until sold out (particularly beer:-), and were happy to keep the till by hand. Restaurants were open where they could serve without electricity - some lit with candles and ran their gas stoves (just about all restaurants in NYC run the kitchen off gas.)
In Tribeca, where I worked, all the bodegas I passed, walking home, were open and selling.
Yes that's true, but what does it mean? It can take on any meaning you want for "live" - living, realtime, synchronous, AJAXy etc. All of that's implied, without saying why it's "live," so it's just marketing. I get the sense it just means "networked," but that'll change, too.
Local Live, Live Drive... ActiveX, Active Desktop,
I keep noticing the trend: Microsoft gives their product names a prefix or suffix that adds a sporty/jaunty sense, without changing the name's meaning.
Pure marketing. In the 80s they prefixed their software with "Microsoft"... everything had to be "Microsoft [blank]." I liked that, gives strong brand identity. But the Live and Active monkiers are a bit confusing, as they don't contribute a consistent, useful meaning.
And you're just making up history. Ford was an early adopter, but was in no way the innovator. He adopted the 40-hour work week long after the American union movement made the 40 hour week one of the top agenda items of workers, along with higher wages, safer working conditions, etc.
The 1938 labor law was way behind the curve, as many unions had already obtained their demands in the workplace. Ford just knew which way the wind was blowing.
Even if TIA were so well-tuned that it could screen out 99% of the population as being not potential terrorists, that leaves 2.9 million people to investigate. That's a huge pool. Many false positives will come of it, and meanwhile actual terrorists will be missed, with great resources spent chasing false leads.
There is no substitute for on-the-ground investigation and detective work. If you look to pre-911 investigations of the 19 hijackers, they were well-known to our investigators. Very well known.
Undocumented immigrant-terrorists will be the most diffcult to locate - under the ICE radar and not using electronic money, I imagine. In the end, foreign policy trumps large-scale security efforts, which ultimately fail due to the net not being fine enough.
Probably perfect for the world you live in. But there are many worlds - designers with their fancy OSX workstations, software developers running Linux and Windows, secretaries using Office, etc.
Windows is definitely not appropriate for all real-world organizations, it just happens to be ubiquitous. But so us *nix, in the web world.
And for the record, if the only thing you can make out of an OpenBSD installation is a firewall, then you deserve to be stuck on Windows. OpenBSD also makes a swell webserver and mailserver, and runs many, many sites.
Thank you for this perfect case-in-point regarding Republicans debating politics and fascism. From Limbaugh's Tactical Debate Handbook- "Rule #27: When all else fails, spew profanities, tell your opponent they're stupid, and (Rule #13) equate them with terrorists."
It's important to never ever let your opponent believe their needs or ideas have merit. Quite the opposite- be openly hostile, and let them know that hanging's too good for them.
It is really amazing to me that the two main political parties seem to break down in the following way:
Republicans: Not OK to kill unborn (innocent) children - OK to kill (guilty) murderers
Democrats: OK to kill unborn (innocent) children - Not OK to kill (guilty) murderers
As stated, I'm a conservative but most time, only given the lessor of two evils, regarding abortion I have to vote Republican.
Do you see how they've taken your vote on just one topic? They found the one thing that makes you angry. In return they get your vote for triggering your feelings... on a topic that will never be won.
Also in exchange, they got control of all three branches of government of the most powerful country on the planet. You helped them in their plan to do whatever they want, and in exchange, maybe they'll change abortion. You get endless war, the hate of the rest of the world, higher taxes than you ever imagined (how do you expect the astounding national debt, and tax rebates, will be paid back?), stripped national health care, and more corruption.
In the end, after the Roberts-Alito court switches off Roe v. Wade, there will be a backlash. Women lacking abortion will seek illegal ones. Some will get sick, some will die. The media of today, unlike that of pre-Roe, will cover it in amazing detail.
Democrats will take more offices, and win back the Congress. Already that is starting to happen. Conservatives won't be able to maintain control. The laws of the universe do not allow this.
There are degrees of abortion: Plan B and double-dose birth control pill, in the first days, is okay with me. Late second or third term abortion is not, but I cannot accept the alternatives...
What about her life? What if she's in medical danger? Conservatives don't give a shit about women's health, and that's the crux of it.
That's already becoming a big problem. A tiny, tiny example is the inadvertent death of a fetus, aka stillborn child. In many hospitals, now, that no longer offer abortion services, if you have a stillborn child, your only choice is to give birth to it! If you didn't know this, dilation and extraction (one of the abortion procedures) is the same process used to remove stillborn children.
Instead, the woman must "give birth" to a corpse that may have been dead for, often, weeks? Over a month? Rotting, stinking, dead flesh that comes out in chunks and pieces. It's a horrible opposite to birthing a living healthy child, it's torture in a way, and though it has nothing in common with abortion besides the procedure, anti-abortion is making this a more frequent occurrence.
Finally, when you call it murder, and take away the right for a woman to do with her own body what she chooses, then there is precedent set for controlling what people do with their own bodies. That is not okay with me.
Conservatives seem to hunger for the good old days of back-alley abortions and women dying of infections. Anti-abortion? Pro-death sentence? Pro-illegal abortion death.
What's interesting in comparing Republicans to Nazis: the Nazis gained power only after the world-wide depression of the 1930's. While the Nazi party was founded in 1920, they didn't get much interest until the depression (revolutions usually do not build momentum during prosperity.) Contradicting this, to wit: the Republican movement was born during a long period of increasing wealth and prosperity in America.
Then, how did the Republicans take power in the U.S.? It didn't take an economic downturn. Americans had everything they wanted, much more than the rest of the world. Seems that they brainwashed the half of American that votes for them. They spent years colonizing voters' minds with hateful, anti-democratic thought viruses, focused almost entirely upon non-germane social topics such as sexual orientation, abortion, health care, the public retirement plan, the Clintons' finances and sexual adventures... the list goes on and on.
And, most sadly, in fear of losing what power they held onto, the Democrats mostly went along for the ride, voting up Republican plans to strip the country of its social safety nets, to run an endless, world-wide war against terrorism, and invade energy-rich countries on the pretext that they masterminded the 9/11 attack.
It almost makes the Republicans look like they're power grubbing just for power's sake.
The body's closed-loop system requires that the ingredients for making the anti-oxidants be available in good quantity. Today's hospitals are not exactly outposts of healthy nutritious food, and regular "allopathic" doctors are not very knowledgeable about nutrition. Last time a relative was in the hospital (my mom), they were serving white bread, processed turkey loaf, and what had to be frozen vegetable bits - your basic CHON food, but devoid of the phytonutrients the fresh fruits and veggies we're told to consume would contain.
In other words, the same results can be obtained from the outside - the antioxidants already available in your food.
Actually, that *is* censorship by a number of definitions. A domain name is, on the Internet, a handle, a nym, a nom-de-plume. Kazakhstan has taken away Cohen's right to publish under his chosen name.
In the United States, a free-speech state relative to Kazakhstan, the removal of a domain name by the government is considered suppression of free speech -- aka censorship. Should be no different anywhere else -- the concept censorship defies political system.
Ruby & Java == Moriarity & Holmes
on
Ruby Off the Rails
·
· Score: 2, Informative
The ruby crowd positions themselves as none other than mortal enemies of Java and anyone stupid enough to still be using that pathetic excuse for a language!
Ruby could be just an also-ran if it didn't have Java to kick around. After ten years of spotlight, it's not hard to find detractors. The real question is, can ruby be defined on its own terms, and not Java's? Doesn't seem like it so far, which isn't good news for longevity.
Also, what you're forgetting is that some programmers like the clarity of a well-defined class hierarchy, and Java's got that. Ruby has got some pretty muddy classes that try to do too much.
...dabbled in it years ago, but didn't find any use for it, but that has nothing to do with my opinion
In fact it sounds like you have no clue whatsoever about Java, from a developer's viewpoint, let alone system administration. You sounda lot like one of those sysadmins who gets whiny when you have to reconfigure a stock redhat installation.
Sure mod me down, but the grandparent post got it right. Java was and still is a capable oop platform, and the best alternative to C++ to-date. And it does run well on many platforms -- if you'd actually done any development with it, you'd find it's a pretty small percent of the time that you have behavior differences you have to code around.
It's not my government either, AC, it's Theirs, the people who bought and paid for it. Anyway, the U.S. is nominally socialistic. They take a slice off the top of most incomes and direct that money to the public good (in theory.) -- "Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor..." -Julius Caesar "War against a foreign country only happens when the moneyed classes think they are going to profit from it." -George Orwell
Mao Tse-Tung is harmless - because he's dead! You are, of course, entitled to your own view of the facts.
The Prof probably meant that the book is harmless. Anybody who disagrees will be booked for a trip to Mao's Little Summer Camp.
Server-side alive
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I'll point out one place where Java has it all over the other webserver languages. When you issue a HTTP request to PHP (the 'P' in LAMP), what happens? Off-the-shelf, it's gotta tokenize the scripts (and in any decent-sized web app there are MANY), then it has to execute it. Then it loads all the data needed to regain the client's context. Finally, now your request can be serviced. HUGELY INEFFICIENT and a really poor design.
With Java, you can connect with a pre-compiled, already-running servlet or JSP page that's part of a *continuously* running system. Shazam! The data's already there! You've got a pool of objects, threads and database connections, all ready to roll.
Whatever minor inefficiencies you point out with JVMs, having a continuously-running website application scores first place. Perl has the potential for this, but then you're stuck with its obscure syntax (not a biggie, but..), limited object orientation and too-new threading feature. Java works better for server apps.
I'd like to see the Ruby crowd compare on this basis. (Not against Ruby, just not familiar enough.)
Cheers.
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
One other thing. If you've got a CPU-intensive task, why not write that in C/C++ and import it to Java? You can do that, you know. The interop is pretty clean. You get the best of both worlds.
Re:The real 90s versus outdated 00s software
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
background threads don't help with CPU intensive work on single processor boxes.
If you know enough about thread management to enter this conversation, then you would know about thread priority settings.
the GC and the JIT'er take CPU cycles, (and lots of them).
What takes lots of CPU cycles is poor design. If you find that you're creating and disposing of objects over-and-over again, such that your memory manager is kept noticeably busy, then it is time to revist your design, whatever the language. Simple memory-management in C++ can mask bad design, because inline malloc/dealloc (vs. the GC) will spread the task over time, instead of bunching it together like Java (on a properly prioritized background thread:), making it less noticeable, even though it might be a similar percent of CPU cycles utilized.
The other thing is, when you use Java J2SE classes from the built-in libraries, you're working with sometimes very general-purpose classes, designed to handle lots of situations. General purpose can equal slow performance. If you want better performance, write better code, specific to the task at hand.
Also realize that Strings in Java are not at all like char[] in C++. Like I said, general purpose classes can be slow. You're better off rolling your own, at times.
You forgot to capitalize 'HTTP/1.1' in the request line. You didn't include a 'host:' field. Those alone are reason enough for a webserver to give you unpredictable results, given that the site is probably a virtual host on that IP.
Slashdot Mirror
"Order of magnitude" is a base ten factor. Silly humans. ;)
Your post reads like a bit of an exaggeration. When it came to doing business in my neighborhood, the Lower East Side, business was good.
:-), and were happy to keep the till by hand. Restaurants were open where they could serve without electricity - some lit with candles and ran their gas stoves (just about all restaurants in NYC run the kitchen off gas.)
The bodegas sold and kept selling all goods they had until sold out (particularly beer
In Tribeca, where I worked, all the bodegas I passed, walking home, were open and selling.
Yes that's true, but what does it mean? It can take on any meaning you want for "live" - living, realtime, synchronous, AJAXy etc. All of that's implied, without saying why it's "live," so it's just marketing. I get the sense it just means "networked," but that'll change, too.
Local Live, Live Drive ... ActiveX, Active Desktop,
... everything had to be "Microsoft [blank]." I liked that, gives strong brand identity. But the Live and Active monkiers are a bit confusing, as they don't contribute a consistent, useful meaning.
I keep noticing the trend: Microsoft gives their product names a prefix or suffix that adds a sporty/jaunty sense, without changing the name's meaning.
Pure marketing. In the 80s they prefixed their software with "Microsoft"
I think you need to retake history.
And you're just making up history. Ford was an early adopter, but was in no way the innovator. He adopted the 40-hour work week long after the American union movement made the 40 hour week one of the top agenda items of workers, along with higher wages, safer working conditions, etc.
The 1938 labor law was way behind the curve, as many unions had already obtained their demands in the workplace. Ford just knew which way the wind was blowing.
Even if TIA were so well-tuned that it could screen out 99% of the population as being not potential terrorists, that leaves 2.9 million people to investigate. That's a huge pool. Many false positives will come of it, and meanwhile actual terrorists will be missed, with great resources spent chasing false leads.
There is no substitute for on-the-ground investigation and detective work. If you look to pre-911 investigations of the 19 hijackers, they were well-known to our investigators. Very well known.
Undocumented immigrant-terrorists will be the most diffcult to locate - under the ICE radar and not using electronic money, I imagine. In the end, foreign policy trumps large-scale security efforts, which ultimately fail due to the net not being fine enough.
Probably perfect for the world you live in. But there are many worlds - designers with their fancy OSX workstations, software developers running Linux and Windows, secretaries using Office, etc.
Windows is definitely not appropriate for all real-world organizations, it just happens to be ubiquitous. But so us *nix, in the web world.
And for the record, if the only thing you can make out of an OpenBSD installation is a firewall, then you deserve to be stuck on Windows. OpenBSD also makes a swell webserver and mailserver, and runs many, many sites.
...obligatory YSH reference.
+1 that's the truth.
Thank you for this perfect case-in-point regarding Republicans debating politics and fascism. From Limbaugh's Tactical Debate Handbook- "Rule #27: When all else fails, spew profanities, tell your opponent they're stupid, and (Rule #13) equate them with terrorists."
It's important to never ever let your opponent believe their needs or ideas have merit. Quite the opposite- be openly hostile, and let them know that hanging's too good for them.
Do you see how they've taken your vote on just one topic? They found the one thing that makes you angry. In return they get your vote for triggering your feelings... on a topic that will never be won.
Also in exchange, they got control of all three branches of government of the most powerful country on the planet. You helped them in their plan to do whatever they want, and in exchange, maybe they'll change abortion. You get endless war, the hate of the rest of the world, higher taxes than you ever imagined (how do you expect the astounding national debt, and tax rebates, will be paid back?), stripped national health care, and more corruption.
In the end, after the Roberts-Alito court switches off Roe v. Wade, there will be a backlash. Women lacking abortion will seek illegal ones. Some will get sick, some will die. The media of today, unlike that of pre-Roe, will cover it in amazing detail.
Democrats will take more offices, and win back the Congress. Already that is starting to happen. Conservatives won't be able to maintain control. The laws of the universe do not allow this.
There are degrees of abortion: Plan B and double-dose birth control pill, in the first days, is okay with me. Late second or third term abortion is not, but I cannot accept the alternatives...
What about her life? What if she's in medical danger? Conservatives don't give a shit about women's health, and that's the crux of it.
That's already becoming a big problem. A tiny, tiny example is the inadvertent death of a fetus, aka stillborn child. In many hospitals, now, that no longer offer abortion services, if you have a stillborn child, your only choice is to give birth to it! If you didn't know this, dilation and extraction (one of the abortion procedures) is the same process used to remove stillborn children.
Instead, the woman must "give birth" to a corpse that may have been dead for, often, weeks? Over a month? Rotting, stinking, dead flesh that comes out in chunks and pieces. It's a horrible opposite to birthing a living healthy child, it's torture in a way, and though it has nothing in common with abortion besides the procedure, anti-abortion is making this a more frequent occurrence.
Finally, when you call it murder, and take away the right for a woman to do with her own body what she chooses, then there is precedent set for controlling what people do with their own bodies. That is not okay with me.
Conservatives seem to hunger for the good old days of back-alley abortions and women dying of infections. Anti-abortion? Pro-death sentence? Pro-illegal abortion death.
What's interesting in comparing Republicans to Nazis: the Nazis gained power only after the world-wide depression of the 1930's. While the Nazi party was founded in 1920, they didn't get much interest until the depression (revolutions usually do not build momentum during prosperity.) Contradicting this, to wit: the Republican movement was born during a long period of increasing wealth and prosperity in America.
Then, how did the Republicans take power in the U.S.? It didn't take an economic downturn. Americans had everything they wanted, much more than the rest of the world. Seems that they brainwashed the half of American that votes for them. They spent years colonizing voters' minds with hateful, anti-democratic thought viruses, focused almost entirely upon non-germane social topics such as sexual orientation, abortion, health care, the public retirement plan, the Clintons' finances and sexual adventures ... the list goes on and on.
And, most sadly, in fear of losing what power they held onto, the Democrats mostly went along for the ride, voting up Republican plans to strip the country of its social safety nets, to run an endless, world-wide war against terrorism, and invade energy-rich countries on the pretext that they masterminded the 9/11 attack.
It almost makes the Republicans look like they're power grubbing just for power's sake.
Dear mod-gods, how on earth was my post flamebait? 50% insightful, 50% flamebait? No attacks on anybody? Please explain.
The body's closed-loop system requires that the ingredients for making the anti-oxidants be available in good quantity. Today's hospitals are not exactly outposts of healthy nutritious food, and regular "allopathic" doctors are not very knowledgeable about nutrition. Last time a relative was in the hospital (my mom), they were serving white bread, processed turkey loaf, and what had to be frozen vegetable bits - your basic CHON food, but devoid of the phytonutrients the fresh fruits and veggies we're told to consume would contain.
In other words, the same results can be obtained from the outside - the antioxidants already available in your food.
This is hardly censorship
Actually, that *is* censorship by a number of definitions. A domain name is, on the Internet, a handle, a nym, a nom-de-plume. Kazakhstan has taken away Cohen's right to publish under his chosen name.
In the United States, a free-speech state relative to Kazakhstan, the removal of a domain name by the government is considered suppression of free speech -- aka censorship. Should be no different anywhere else -- the concept censorship defies political system.
The ruby crowd positions themselves as none other than mortal enemies of Java and anyone stupid enough to still be using that pathetic excuse for a language!
Ruby could be just an also-ran if it didn't have Java to kick around. After ten years of spotlight, it's not hard to find detractors. The real question is, can ruby be defined on its own terms, and not Java's? Doesn't seem like it so far, which isn't good news for longevity.
Also, what you're forgetting is that some programmers like the clarity of a well-defined class hierarchy, and Java's got that. Ruby has got some pretty muddy classes that try to do too much.
...dabbled in it years ago, but didn't find any use for it, but that has nothing to do with my opinion
In fact it sounds like you have no clue whatsoever about Java, from a developer's viewpoint, let alone system administration. You sound a lot like one of those sysadmins who gets whiny when you have to reconfigure a stock redhat installation.
Sure mod me down, but the grandparent post got it right. Java was and still is a capable oop platform, and the best alternative to C++ to-date. And it does run well on many platforms -- if you'd actually done any development with it, you'd find it's a pretty small percent of the time that you have behavior differences you have to code around.
It's not my government either, AC, it's Theirs , the people who bought and paid for it. Anyway, the U.S. is nominally socialistic. They take a slice off the top of most incomes and direct that money to the public good (in theory.)
--
"Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor..." -Julius Caesar
"War against a foreign country only happens when the moneyed classes think they are going to profit from it." -George Orwell
Mao Tse-Tung is harmless - because he's dead! You are, of course, entitled to your own view of the facts.
The Prof probably meant that the book is harmless. Anybody who disagrees will be booked for a trip to Mao's Little Summer Camp.
I'll point out one place where Java has it all over the other webserver languages. When you issue a HTTP request to PHP (the 'P' in LAMP), what happens? Off-the-shelf, it's gotta tokenize the scripts (and in any decent-sized web app there are MANY), then it has to execute it. Then it loads all the data needed to regain the client's context. Finally, now your request can be serviced. HUGELY INEFFICIENT and a really poor design.
With Java, you can connect with a pre-compiled, already-running servlet or JSP page that's part of a *continuously* running system. Shazam! The data's already there! You've got a pool of objects, threads and database connections, all ready to roll.
Whatever minor inefficiencies you point out with JVMs, having a continuously-running website application scores first place. Perl has the potential for this, but then you're stuck with its obscure syntax (not a biggie, but..), limited object orientation and too-new threading feature. Java works better for server apps.
I'd like to see the Ruby crowd compare on this basis. (Not against Ruby, just not familiar enough.)
Cheers.
One other thing. If you've got a CPU-intensive task, why not write that in C/C++ and import it to Java? You can do that, you know. The interop is pretty clean. You get the best of both worlds.
background threads don't help with CPU intensive work on single processor boxes.
:), making it less noticeable, even though it might be a similar percent of CPU cycles utilized.
If you know enough about thread management to enter this conversation, then you would know about thread priority settings.
the GC and the JIT'er take CPU cycles, (and lots of them).
What takes lots of CPU cycles is poor design. If you find that you're creating and disposing of objects over-and-over again, such that your memory manager is kept noticeably busy, then it is time to revist your design, whatever the language. Simple memory-management in C++ can mask bad design, because inline malloc/dealloc (vs. the GC) will spread the task over time, instead of bunching it together like Java (on a properly prioritized background thread
Good reading to this end:
Effective Java
Effective C++
The other thing is, when you use Java J2SE classes from the built-in libraries, you're working with sometimes very general-purpose classes, designed to handle lots of situations. General purpose can equal slow performance. If you want better performance, write better code, specific to the task at hand.
Also realize that Strings in Java are not at all like char[] in C++. Like I said, general purpose classes can be slow. You're better off rolling your own, at times.
Cheers.
If you've ever read Consumer Reports you'd know that it's not "consumers" who are doing the testing. Please re-mod the parent as 'Funny'.
You forgot to capitalize 'HTTP/1.1' in the request line. You didn't include a 'host:' field. Those alone are reason enough for a webserver to give you unpredictable results, given that the site is probably a virtual host on that IP.