Then, we watched other people play games, and we played computer games.
Next, we watched other people play computer games.
And now, eliminating all human-to-human interaction, we watch computers play games.
Who called us antisocial?;-) Oh well, king's gambit ftw, rock out with your pawn out, good luck... "ladies and gentlemen"? Or is it "Nuts and Bolts"? "Plugs and Jacks"?
Approximately 40%-50% of the public accepts a biblical creationist account of the origins of life, while comparable numbers accept the idea that humans evolved over time.
I just want to point out that evolution doesn't address the origin of life, but only how life changes over time.
However, the two are related, in that they're both necessary to know about if want to understand how life got to be what it is now, and how it's likely to develop in the future.
What exactly does fair mean? I would think that people want a price that's competitive.
That might be a bad definition: I'm saying people want to pay you what everyone else charges for the same stuff. That doesn't say anything about the pricing of goods relative to one another (houses vs. cars vs. food), or in any absolute terms (n hours of labor should by me k donuts).
But I think there's something true about it: after we have experienced everything for free (on the black market), paying large amounts of money for the same thing (or, in the case of DRM, an inferior product) doesn't seem so appealing.
Yet, I find it difficult to believe that piracy hasn't meant a single lost sale. That is: before internet piracy became common, people didn't mind paying the current album price as much as they do now.
If I'm right, then the competition from free stuff is what drives consumer demand for lower prices, not the prices themselves.
Potential buffer overflows, de-referencing null pointers etc should not get past the *compiler*.
Note, however, that there's nothing stopping you from writing socket [...] system(recv()) if your language has sockets and the ability to run other programs.
Some security problems arise not because you failed at expressing what you meant, but because you (probably unknowingly) meant the wrong thing.
That being said,
To be honest I do not have a prefered language to suggest
Python does all your buffer work for you. It doesn't have null, although the None object acts kinda' like it. I'm sure similar things can be said about perl, ruby and shell scripts.
But that's probably not the answer you wanted.
I can also say good things about Haskell. It's a functional language similar to ML*. The type system forces you to be explicit about anything with side effects, in particular I/O. It doesn't have pointers (well, except behind the surface), so there are no nulls.
There's an algebraic datatype called Maybe (taking a type parameter t) which can either be "No value" or "Some value of type t", so there's your null-equivalent. But---you have to be explicit about wanting a 'Maybe t' rather than just a 't', and the compiler warns you if you don't handle the no-value case (similar to C's switch/enum warning).
The thing I like the most: even though you can violate the rules about being explicit about your side effects, the way to do it is by calling a function named unsafePerformIO. If you read the documentation of it (http://cvs.haskell.org/Hugs/pages/libraries/base/System-IO-Unsafe.html), you god damn know that you're being a naughty boy. And it's easy for your version control system to grep for this and automatically reject checkins using it;-)
* ML similarities: type inference, the type system, how algebraic data types work and look, syntax of function application (both partial and complete), lists are fairly important, has map/filter/reduce, you can define your own operators and their precedence.
Saying it isn't the hackers fault that improper [methods] were used to secure a site is like saying it isn't the muggers fault that the lady's handbag was so easy to steal.
An important difference: in principle, computer systems can be configured to only do the things that should be allowed, while remaining useful at the same time.
(not counting attacks that require physical access.)
I'm not saying the possibility leaves the hackers blame-free. But there's at least a case to be made that the administrators didn't do their job perfectly.
Or, maybe rephrase what you mean in a different way. Emphasis on usability is a great idea. I don't know that defining usability in terms of an age range is a good idea. In particular, I think 6 year olds want to do different things with computers than adults.
And here's an anecdote which pluralizes into statistics;-)
My friend (who's not a techie: I've installed windows for him at least once; he asked me for anti-virus advice) just bought a mini laptop (n{et,ote}book AOA150-Bw) from Acer, which runs Linux. In particular, Linpus; the one with a bunch of app icons instead of a normal desktop, and an XP-lookalike window decoration.
He reports to be happy with it. Assuming he represents the broader population, usability-wise we're apparently already there. All we need is a good selling proposition.
I can think of two: cheaper. We used to say that a lot, but then windows comes with software that has a negative price (say, from Norton), so maybe that's not a good argument.
The other is the lack of alternatives for some hardware that itself has a good selling proposition. The current buzz is mini-laptops sporting an ARM processor. They're famous for (1) incredible battery life; and (2) not running Windows;-)
I was with Duke for twelve years, Dr. Hirnficker. We always made plans to go out at nights, but he always had to work late every night. I know kicking alien scumbag asses is a tough job, but every night?
One day I found a receipt on the floor; it must have fallen out of his wallet. When I read the "new models" and "better engines" line items, I suspected that his staying late on the job wasn't really for more work. I think he was flirting with other technology.
But despite what you say, Duke never laid a hand on me, I swear. The bruises are just from walking into doorknobs and cupboard handles. Really, Dr., it's true! Duke was always good to me. He was always my friend, my love and my soulmate. We were meant to be together. Forever.
I guess the challenge of the Windows ecosystem is what draws in the thousands of viruses and malware applications they get.
I think I fixed that for you.
If by PC you mean x86-based computers not from Apple, then if you install OS X on a Dell box, it would suddenly become malware-ridden according to what you say, right?
And if it's not the operating system, what's the difference---with respect to malware---between an x86 running Ubuntu and an x86 running Ubuntu (one from Apple, one from Dell)?
The "Mac vs. PC" distinction is really about OS X vs. Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
First, we played games.
Then, we watched other people play games, and we played computer games.
Next, we watched other people play computer games.
And now, eliminating all human-to-human interaction, we watch computers play games.
Who called us antisocial? ;-) Oh well, king's gambit ftw, rock out with your pawn out, good luck... "ladies and gentlemen"? Or is it "Nuts and Bolts"? "Plugs and Jacks"?
So, what do they sell?
We at FirePond are dedicated to bringing you turn-key enterprise solutions to help you leverage user-created low-risk high-yield synergy.
Is that you, BadAnalogyGuy?
One to burn, one to keep on a shelf
And in the darkness bind them?!?
I don't believe in God.
Let's assume that he does exist, and just like the Bible says, he's omniscient and omnipotent.
That would imply that
Ergo, God doesn't want me to believe in him.
Approximately 40%-50% of the public accepts a biblical creationist account of the origins of life, while comparable numbers accept the idea that humans evolved over time.
I just want to point out that evolution doesn't address the origin of life, but only how life changes over time.
However, the two are related, in that they're both necessary to know about if want to understand how life got to be what it is now, and how it's likely to develop in the future.
they simply want a fair price for a product.
What exactly does fair mean? I would think that people want a price that's competitive.
That might be a bad definition: I'm saying people want to pay you what everyone else charges for the same stuff. That doesn't say anything about the pricing of goods relative to one another (houses vs. cars vs. food), or in any absolute terms (n hours of labor should by me k donuts).
But I think there's something true about it: after we have experienced everything for free (on the black market), paying large amounts of money for the same thing (or, in the case of DRM, an inferior product) doesn't seem so appealing.
Yet, I find it difficult to believe that piracy hasn't meant a single lost sale. That is: before internet piracy became common, people didn't mind paying the current album price as much as they do now.
If I'm right, then the competition from free stuff is what drives consumer demand for lower prices, not the prices themselves.
The internet is useless. [and then the signature:] Will program for bandwidth
Heh, that's pretty funny. Here, let me try one:
Will program for new irony detector.
Potential buffer overflows, de-referencing null pointers etc should not get past the *compiler*.
Note, however, that there's nothing stopping you from writing socket [...] system(recv()) if your language has sockets and the ability to run other programs.
Some security problems arise not because you failed at expressing what you meant, but because you (probably unknowingly) meant the wrong thing.
That being said,
To be honest I do not have a prefered language to suggest
Python does all your buffer work for you. It doesn't have null, although the None object acts kinda' like it. I'm sure similar things can be said about perl, ruby and shell scripts.
But that's probably not the answer you wanted.
I can also say good things about Haskell. It's a functional language similar to ML*. The type system forces you to be explicit about anything with side effects, in particular I/O. It doesn't have pointers (well, except behind the surface), so there are no nulls.
There's an algebraic datatype called Maybe (taking a type parameter t) which can either be "No value" or "Some value of type t", so there's your null-equivalent. But---you have to be explicit about wanting a 'Maybe t' rather than just a 't', and the compiler warns you if you don't handle the no-value case (similar to C's switch/enum warning).
The thing I like the most: even though you can violate the rules about being explicit about your side effects, the way to do it is by calling a function named unsafePerformIO. If you read the documentation of it (http://cvs.haskell.org/Hugs/pages/libraries/base/System-IO-Unsafe.html), you god damn know that you're being a naughty boy. And it's easy for your version control system to grep for this and automatically reject checkins using it ;-)
* ML similarities: type inference, the type system, how algebraic data types work and look, syntax of function application (both partial and complete), lists are fairly important, has map/filter/reduce, you can define your own operators and their precedence.
elevator firmware runs Windows?
Where would you like to go today?
all while making geometrical shapes
Tetrominoes... Not just "geometrical shapes", tetrominoes!
a crime recently created in order to protect financial institutions from well-founded rumors.
I think I fixed that. At least, it could be...
Its possible to be an elected dictator
For once, this is on-topic:
"Just like Hitler and the Nazis!"
Apparently no one on (the admittedly anti-windows skewed) slashdot wants a license.
Maybe you should start emailing people about it?
Looking forward to never having to configure anything, and having a bug free system that does everything I want!
Cool, I didn't know macs came with Dvorak as the default keyboard layout ;-)
But how the hell did Apple find out the key to my wireless network? :(
Saying it isn't the hackers fault that improper [methods] were used to secure a site is like saying it isn't the muggers fault that the lady's handbag was so easy to steal.
An important difference: in principle, computer systems can be configured to only do the things that should be allowed, while remaining useful at the same time.
(not counting attacks that require physical access.)
I'm not saying the possibility leaves the hackers blame-free. But there's at least a case to be made that the administrators didn't do their job perfectly.
The real math works out to give you a 32 percent chance of none of them giving you the right statistics.
In the remaining 68%, you still have to figure out who's right and who's wrong ;-)
If it's a command center, why aren't there any SCVs?
I'll mod you wrong instead ;)
Or, maybe rephrase what you mean in a different way. Emphasis on usability is a great idea. I don't know that defining usability in terms of an age range is a good idea. In particular, I think 6 year olds want to do different things with computers than adults.
And here's an anecdote which pluralizes into statistics ;-)
My friend (who's not a techie: I've installed windows for him at least once; he asked me for anti-virus advice) just bought a mini laptop (n{et,ote}book AOA150-Bw) from Acer, which runs Linux. In particular, Linpus; the one with a bunch of app icons instead of a normal desktop, and an XP-lookalike window decoration.
He reports to be happy with it. Assuming he represents the broader population, usability-wise we're apparently already there. All we need is a good selling proposition.
I can think of two: cheaper. We used to say that a lot, but then windows comes with software that has a negative price (say, from Norton), so maybe that's not a good argument.
The other is the lack of alternatives for some hardware that itself has a good selling proposition. The current buzz is mini-laptops sporting an ARM processor. They're famous for (1) incredible battery life; and (2) not running Windows ;-)
I was with Duke for twelve years, Dr. Hirnficker. We always made plans to go out at nights, but he always had to work late every night. I know kicking alien scumbag asses is a tough job, but every night?
One day I found a receipt on the floor; it must have fallen out of his wallet. When I read the "new models" and "better engines" line items, I suspected that his staying late on the job wasn't really for more work. I think he was flirting with other technology.
But despite what you say, Duke never laid a hand on me, I swear. The bruises are just from walking into doorknobs and cupboard handles. Really, Dr., it's true! Duke was always good to me. He was always my friend, my love and my soulmate. We were meant to be together. Forever.
the only better thinking time is when I'm on the toilet
Yeah, it's a great place to make some shit up.
Thank you, I'm here all week. Try the laxative^W veal.
(*sigh* I hate being the pedantic one...)
I guess the challenge of the Windows ecosystem is what draws in the thousands of viruses and malware applications they get.
I think I fixed that for you.
If by PC you mean x86-based computers not from Apple, then if you install OS X on a Dell box, it would suddenly become malware-ridden according to what you say, right?
And if it's not the operating system, what's the difference---with respect to malware---between an x86 running Ubuntu and an x86 running Ubuntu (one from Apple, one from Dell)?
The "Mac vs. PC" distinction is really about OS X vs. Windows.
but if we need to get rid of some werewolf fire ants
They half man, half wolf, half ant? Manwolfant?
Or are they half wolf, half ant-man?
Obviously they're minerals.
I once got stung by a chunk of beryllium. That shit hurts!
Kinda like fantasia and mickey mouse and the brooms, y'know.
Or Tarrasques.
(geek card check-mark whoring since day 1+e^(i pi))