The DOD table followed a fact sheet published by the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs in April 2004, which stated: "Among the nuclear-weapon states, China...possesses the smallest nuclear arsenal." Since Britain has declared that it has less than 200 operationally available warheads, and the United States, Russia, and France have more, the Chinese statement could be interpreted to mean that Chinaâ(TM)s nuclear arsenal is smaller than Britainâ(TM)s.
China is also reducing its arsenal, it's the trendy thing since the people like it and you can still keep enough weapons to destroy your enemies several times over.
Really? Am I the only person that found it interesting that Lucene, the only non C/C++ implementation, gave some pretty impressive stats? I mean, it's written in Java and although it has a slower index time its search time, index size and relevancy are impressive.
Of course you are, fool! Everyone else on slashdot knows exactly how Lucene and sqlite's indexing systems work. I don't know why they bothered to take the benchmarks at all, anyone with half a clue has integrated a Java engine running Lucene into sqlite and hooked it into MyISAM already..
But the weird thing is that in the article he's not only against Mono, but against C# itself, which is as much of a standardized language as JavaScript. MS couldn't whip out any patents against C#, and as Stallman points out the FSF has its own C# implementation. So why is he speaking out against C#, a standardized language?
For once RMS has actually been too brief, and has left reasoning totally out of this brief memo.
Watching a zombie realistically fall over onto a handrail, then slowly slump backwards and fall off, isn't what makes L4D fun, but it'd be a less enjoyable experience without it. Constant reminders you're playing a game aren't a problem for some types of game, for others they are
Don't worry, for whatever reason this generation of students doesn't yet have the software to simulate physics for the purposes of learning. We do have software to make manipulating integrals and derivatives easier, but it doesn't become useful until quite late. Really it's still overhead projectors and acetone slides, you're not missing much, but hopefully that is yet to change
Problem with that is that limit based calculus itself is fundamentally based on abstract concepts like finding the sum of infinite parts. A physical analogue to an equation can make grappling with the physics much easier, but I don't think understanding goes the other way. Who "gets" electromagnetism and uses that to help them learn partial derivatives? It can easily go the other way though
I guess if you're unlucky enough to have four African Broadband Balloons take out all four of your engines on a passenger airliner, and you don't have enough height to coast to a runway, you're probably doomed anyway.
I want the list of examples and how the problem manifested itself and the results, with perhaps some humour and trivia too (i.e. an entertaining article), not a literal list of 15 design mistakes verbatim. But thanks for the effort.
Why not take out the part of wordpad that renders rich-text and replace it with open-office's renderer? Because it'd be a complete waste of time. So why try and replace Trident? Will the results be superior?
There's going to be a Windows ME 3?? Holy crap, I thought MS were hitting it big with Windows 7, what are they thinking going with a new version of Windows ME??
More contacts -> more data transfer at same clock rate.
More blades on a razor -> not much difference.
(Also re:title: "Metaphor"? Don't you mean "analogy"?)
I'm not an anti-nuke wacko, but I had heard that the resignation had been a forced move anyway, though when the bombs dropped it was siezed upon as a way to surrender with dignity.
Corrent me if I'm wrong
I had a brief experience with Xilinx during a computer science course. It was (no exaggeration) the most buggy, error/crash-prone Windows 95 throwback nightmare piece of software I've ever used. Everyone in the labs were often unable to complete (simple hardware fundamentals 101) assignments, just because of software problems.
YMMV of course, but if I never have to use Xilinx again I'll be glad.
Just to add to this: You can actually get/make HDMI->ethernet->HDMI converter cables. If you cut out and wire the cable in yourself it'll work fine, if you use professional ones it'll route through your switches and everything. This should leave no question about why HDMI was developed; it isn't cheaper, it doesn't run for longer lengths, it doesn't give a better picture, it's just a different plug with copper inside to make us buy new shit every year.
I've spent over $200 this year on HDMI cables and an HDMI splitter (mainly to run a cable through a wall to a projector), and I diligently made sure they were all 1.3b compliant like the moron I am, and along comes 1.4.. How can a cable which streams digital data from A to B become obsolete due to a protocol change? Have these guys really not heard of the OSI model (also known as "common sense")?
Things that live under rocks on the floor of the Pacific Ocean knew it would happen.
Something like this won't get off the ground as long as there are people willing to fight against it, and we've got no shortage of those around here.
Not really.. It has been very close to getting through, even recently there was a TV show about it and it gave a definite impression of an idea which is unpopular but will go through.
Remember it was (I think still is?) actually implemented on several small ISPs, and I won't be happy until I hear a definitive no; watered down filtering isn't a victory, an opt-out clause isn't a victory, and it could still well end up that way.
Also I don't know about "people willing to fight it" being the real reason. In the TV show debate about the internet filter (and in mainstream online news forums) the audience were largely in favor of censorship, but it was the glaring impracticality that swung it slightly in the opposition's favor.
Maybe the debate audience was a biased sample, but there really wasn't (and isn't) the fierce opposition to the filter that would make a senator do a U-turn.
Slashdot Mirror
The DOD table followed a fact sheet published by the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs in April 2004, which stated: "Among the nuclear-weapon states, China...possesses the smallest nuclear arsenal." Since Britain has declared that it has less than 200 operationally available warheads, and the United States, Russia, and France have more, the Chinese statement could be interpreted to mean that Chinaâ(TM)s nuclear arsenal is smaller than Britainâ(TM)s.
Link
China is also reducing its arsenal, it's the trendy thing since the people like it and you can still keep enough weapons to destroy your enemies several times over.
Really? Am I the only person that found it interesting that Lucene, the only non C/C++ implementation, gave some pretty impressive stats? I mean, it's written in Java and although it has a slower index time its search time, index size and relevancy are impressive.
Of course you are, fool! Everyone else on slashdot knows exactly how Lucene and sqlite's indexing systems work. I don't know why they bothered to take the benchmarks at all, anyone with half a clue has integrated a Java engine running Lucene into sqlite and hooked it into MyISAM already..
That must be why no such vulnerability has been found in Windows Mobile in all the years it has been on the market
I hope he's right..
-- Magneto
I think the ark was measured in qubits. Frankly I'm not sure what the fuss is about, don't we have the metric system now?
No idea why that posted as AC...
They derived physics from maths? What part of lim h->0 { [f(x+h)-f(x)]/h } do you think Newton was inspired by physics to write?
But the weird thing is that in the article he's not only against Mono, but against C# itself, which is as much of a standardized language as JavaScript. MS couldn't whip out any patents against C#, and as Stallman points out the FSF has its own C# implementation. So why is he speaking out against C#, a standardized language?
For once RMS has actually been too brief, and has left reasoning totally out of this brief memo.
You just raped the GP.. Rapist.
Watching a zombie realistically fall over onto a handrail, then slowly slump backwards and fall off, isn't what makes L4D fun, but it'd be a less enjoyable experience without it. Constant reminders you're playing a game aren't a problem for some types of game, for others they are
Don't worry, for whatever reason this generation of students doesn't yet have the software to simulate physics for the purposes of learning. We do have software to make manipulating integrals and derivatives easier, but it doesn't become useful until quite late. Really it's still overhead projectors and acetone slides, you're not missing much, but hopefully that is yet to change
Problem with that is that limit based calculus itself is fundamentally based on abstract concepts like finding the sum of infinite parts. A physical analogue to an equation can make grappling with the physics much easier, but I don't think understanding goes the other way. Who "gets" electromagnetism and uses that to help them learn partial derivatives? It can easily go the other way though
I guess if you're unlucky enough to have four African Broadband Balloons take out all four of your engines on a passenger airliner, and you don't have enough height to coast to a runway, you're probably doomed anyway.
I want the list of examples and how the problem manifested itself and the results, with perhaps some humour and trivia too (i.e. an entertaining article), not a literal list of 15 design mistakes verbatim. But thanks for the effort.
Why not take out the part of wordpad that renders rich-text and replace it with open-office's renderer? Because it'd be a complete waste of time. So why try and replace Trident? Will the results be superior?
There's going to be a Windows ME 3?? Holy crap, I thought MS were hitting it big with Windows 7, what are they thinking going with a new version of Windows ME??
Mod parent up. MS definelty jumped on parallel processing early
How is this info relevant in 2009 ?
Because I'm still taking the course, and the Xilinx unit was only 2-3 years ago.
More contacts -> more data transfer at same clock rate. More blades on a razor -> not much difference. (Also re:title: "Metaphor"? Don't you mean "analogy"?)
I'm not an anti-nuke wacko, but I had heard that the resignation had been a forced move anyway, though when the bombs dropped it was siezed upon as a way to surrender with dignity. Corrent me if I'm wrong
I had a brief experience with Xilinx during a computer science course. It was (no exaggeration) the most buggy, error/crash-prone Windows 95 throwback nightmare piece of software I've ever used. Everyone in the labs were often unable to complete (simple hardware fundamentals 101) assignments, just because of software problems.
YMMV of course, but if I never have to use Xilinx again I'll be glad.
Just to add to this: You can actually get/make HDMI->ethernet->HDMI converter cables. If you cut out and wire the cable in yourself it'll work fine, if you use professional ones it'll route through your switches and everything. This should leave no question about why HDMI was developed; it isn't cheaper, it doesn't run for longer lengths, it doesn't give a better picture, it's just a different plug with copper inside to make us buy new shit every year.
I've spent over $200 this year on HDMI cables and an HDMI splitter (mainly to run a cable through a wall to a projector), and I diligently made sure they were all 1.3b compliant like the moron I am, and along comes 1.4..
How can a cable which streams digital data from A to B become obsolete due to a protocol change? Have these guys really not heard of the OSI model (also known as "common sense")?
You knew it would happen.
I knew it would happen.
Things that live under rocks on the floor of the Pacific Ocean knew it would happen.
Something like this won't get off the ground as long as there are people willing to fight against it, and we've got no shortage of those around here.
Not really.. It has been very close to getting through, even recently there was a TV show about it and it gave a definite impression of an idea which is unpopular but will go through.
Remember it was (I think still is?) actually implemented on several small ISPs, and I won't be happy until I hear a definitive no; watered down filtering isn't a victory, an opt-out clause isn't a victory, and it could still well end up that way.
Also I don't know about "people willing to fight it" being the real reason. In the TV show debate about the internet filter (and in mainstream online news forums) the audience were largely in favor of censorship, but it was the glaring impracticality that swung it slightly in the opposition's favor.
Maybe the debate audience was a biased sample, but there really wasn't (and isn't) the fierce opposition to the filter that would make a senator do a U-turn.
My code is flawless; if it gets rejected it's time to fork.