The special theory of relativity also took a while before it could be proven in experiments, and some aspects of the general theory of relativity still haven't been experimentally observed today.
An interesting and fun read, it lists and explains the challenges being faced with Perl 6 very well. Unfortunately it doesn't explain how Perl 6 will respond to those challenges; just that Perl 6 will be WOP (whatever oriented programming), which is more than a little vague.
After having read it I get the feeling Perl 6 is having an identity crisis, but that Wall knows what he's doing.
You're not suggesting that this hidden download for developers is a way of getting people to "forget about XP", are you? Does it have some sort of amnesia inducing software or something?
Jet engines take massive amounts of air in on one end and blast it out on the other end, it's not the exhaust that's propelling it, it's the air that got sucked in.
If you're replacing a 97 Wizard, you should use an Aero wizard. If you're writing a new app, please do not use a wizard. They're obnoxious, and send the message: "We didn't know how to organize your options in any sort of logical way, so here's a powerpoint that lets you fill in the blanks, masquearding as a UI."
Wizards are like many UI constructs; they are often abused but they can be very useful. Access data import Wizards, installation Wizards, Visual Studio database creation Wizards, etc.
Whenever you need the user to enter a series of logically grouped options before you can begin to do what the user wants a Wizard is the way to go. It's either going to be a Wizard, or a large unwieldy dialog box.
I think Microsoft's suggestions here are all good, but of course if you're the sort of developer that has to read them you're probably the sort of developer which doesn't care about the UI and won't implement them anyway. Which is a shame, because the UI can go a long way to make your program better.
Yet it is precisely the friction between the wheels and road which make a car go forward. Friction with the car wheels is not bad, you need it. Friction with the air is bad, but not the wheels.
I thought it was the exhaust coming out of the back that propelled the car forward.. I mean, if electromagnetic radiation can propel something forward surely gaseos exhaust can?
Bear in mind that you're talking about distributions of set of free software. The beauty of our current free software ecosystem is that it's divided into so many small chunks and dependencies. These small parts don't suffer from personality conflicts and other problems that arise with very large, influential projects.
Using add-ons like NoScript you can stop Firefox from executing JavaScript without your consent, but IE has this functionality built in. Using the Windows Live addon you can have tabs in IE too.
FF needs add-ons to remove JavaScript, IE needs add-ons for FF's tabs. The reason the IE seems more secure is that fewer people use it, those who do use it tend to be more computer savvy, and IE has bad default security settings (as is the Windows way). You can't really blame the IE team for this.
Why-oh-why don't casinos just use entropy generators? The user presses a button, a computer generates a number between 0 and 100, if it's lower than or equal to 48 they lose, if it's above then they win.
In fact by using central limit theorem, and allowing the user to enter how many bets they would like to place, and how much money, you can compound an entire nights worth of bets into a fraction of a second! What a time saver!
Turing complete doesn't mean you can realistically run an operating system on it. Brainfuck (>>[>++>-[]) is turing complete, Conway's game of life is turing complete, try coding Linux in either of them.
> In addition, the most legitimate defense of mod chips was always "I GOT IT TO PLAY IMPORTED GAMES!"
DVDs are incredibly easy to scratch, especially in the hands of children, and you have to pay the full price for a new disc. The most legitimate defence is that you want to back the discs up, which is perfectly reasonable and not shady in the least.
I know that was a joke, but this gives the impression that this number in binary is a long stream of 1's and 0's.
Seeing as 2^n is [1 followed by n 0's] in binary, and [1 followed by n 0's] minus 1 is [(n-1) 1's], this number in binary will just be 32,582,656 1's, which isn't decodeable as an MP3.
Slashdot Mirror
It beats offering plastic garfield toys, that's for sure. Too bad their burgers are so disgusting.
Yes, I'm sure the potential for malicious use never crossed the engineers' minds while they were working on this protection mechanism.
Thanks, I was pulling my hair out wondering what they looked like. :-P
.. but not interesting.. I don't want my tax dollars to go to graphics cards. (I understand the parent was being funny, but a mod doesn't seem to.)
The special theory of relativity also took a while before it could be proven in experiments, and some aspects of the general theory of relativity still haven't been experimentally observed today.
An interesting and fun read, it lists and explains the challenges being faced with Perl 6 very well. Unfortunately it doesn't explain how Perl 6 will respond to those challenges; just that Perl 6 will be WOP (whatever oriented programming), which is more than a little vague.
After having read it I get the feeling Perl 6 is having an identity crisis, but that Wall knows what he's doing.
A dodder by any other name would smell tomatoes.
That which we call a dodder by any other word would smell tomatoes.
Especially with Vista's new anti-piracy measures and China's recent anti-piracy pledges. It could be a real foothold for Linux.
These cats were already domesticated, and the mice they occasionally feed on are domesticated, this is just the next step.
Lets face it; students just like to have something to protest about.
You're not suggesting that this hidden download for developers is a way of getting people to "forget about XP", are you? Does it have some sort of amnesia inducing software or something?
Jet engines take massive amounts of air in on one end and blast it out on the other end, it's not the exhaust that's propelling it, it's the air that got sucked in.
If you're replacing a 97 Wizard, you should use an Aero wizard. If you're writing a new app, please do not use a wizard. They're obnoxious, and send the message: "We didn't know how to organize your options in any sort of logical way, so here's a powerpoint that lets you fill in the blanks, masquearding as a UI."
Wizards are like many UI constructs; they are often abused but they can be very useful. Access data import Wizards, installation Wizards, Visual Studio database creation Wizards, etc.
Whenever you need the user to enter a series of logically grouped options before you can begin to do what the user wants a Wizard is the way to go. It's either going to be a Wizard, or a large unwieldy dialog box.
I think Microsoft's suggestions here are all good, but of course if you're the sort of developer that has to read them you're probably the sort of developer which doesn't care about the UI and won't implement them anyway. Which is a shame, because the UI can go a long way to make your program better.
Yet it is precisely the friction between the wheels and road which make a car go forward. Friction with the car wheels is not bad, you need it. Friction with the air is bad, but not the wheels.
I thought it was the exhaust coming out of the back that propelled the car forward.. I mean, if electromagnetic radiation can propel something forward surely gaseos exhaust can?
On the contrary; the melting of polar ice means more iceburgs end up detached from the rest.
If they had plutonium, would they use it to poison a water supply?
Bear in mind that you're talking about distributions of set of free software. The beauty of our current free software ecosystem is that it's divided into so many small chunks and dependencies. These small parts don't suffer from personality conflicts and other problems that arise with very large, influential projects.
Because there are unpatched security holes in it. It's not fit for internet use.
Using add-ons like NoScript you can stop Firefox from executing JavaScript without your consent, but IE has this functionality built in. Using the Windows Live addon you can have tabs in IE too.
FF needs add-ons to remove JavaScript, IE needs add-ons for FF's tabs. The reason the IE seems more secure is that fewer people use it, those who do use it tend to be more computer savvy, and IE has bad default security settings (as is the Windows way). You can't really blame the IE team for this.
Why-oh-why don't casinos just use entropy generators? The user presses a button, a computer generates a number between 0 and 100, if it's lower than or equal to 48 they lose, if it's above then they win.
In fact by using central limit theorem, and allowing the user to enter how many bets they would like to place, and how much money, you can compound an entire nights worth of bets into a fraction of a second! What a time saver!
Turing complete doesn't mean you can realistically run an operating system on it. Brainfuck (>>[>++>-[]) is turing complete, Conway's game of life is turing complete, try coding Linux in either of them.
> In addition, the most legitimate defense of mod chips was always "I GOT IT TO PLAY IMPORTED GAMES!"
DVDs are incredibly easy to scratch, especially in the hands of children, and you have to pay the full price for a new disc. The most legitimate defence is that you want to back the discs up, which is perfectly reasonable and not shady in the least.
I know that was a joke, but this gives the impression that this number in binary is a long stream of 1's and 0's.
Seeing as 2^n is [1 followed by n 0's] in binary, and [1 followed by n 0's] minus 1 is [(n-1) 1's], this number in binary will just be 32,582,656 1's, which isn't decodeable as an MP3.
It should be easy to beat in a given time on easy, more difficult to beat on medium, and impossible to beat in hard.
There's no game which isn't beatable in X hours though; given long enough anyone can beat any game.. Except Ikaruga.