Every college has an entire office dedicated to helping you find money to go there, and the more prestigious a college is, the more money they have to throw at their students in financial aid. Get into a really good school and you'll be able to afford it.
And no, aside from the army nobody's going to give you money to go to college on the condition that you work for them when you get out. That's just silly.
"People are still asking whether people really want robots running around their homes, and folding their clothes," said Damian Thong, senior technology analyst at Macquarie Bank in Tokyo.
I think I speak for most of the audience of this website when I say "ever since I was six."
Some games benefit from levels as a kind of marker for your achievements and progression through the game. Portal is a good example of this, with the levels you have conquered representing the skills and techniques you have mastered.
It's the same thing with RPGs. I've heard the level system criticized as outdated and unnecessary, but looking at someone and being able to say "he's level 20" is a concise way of communicating with other people exactly what kind of player you're talking about.
But people seem to forget that all the '2nd gen' MMOs including WoW borrow heavily from 1st gen games such as Everquest, UO, DAoC etc.
Indeed. Without going back to the drawing board and attempting to revolutionize MMOs as a whole, you'd have to be stupid not to copy WoW (and by extension EQ and friends). You can say what you want about it, but they've gotten quite a lot right, and I'd be very skeptical of any typical MMO that didn't pull a lot of their ideas straight out of WoW.
"Internet Marketing" and "Online Advertising" are pretty much the most corrupt and shady businesses you can involve yourself with. Seriously, if you're thinking about getting into it, but have some morals, go check out being an arms dealer or something. The only legitimate dealings I've seen in this space are between large advertisers (not networks, I'm talking blue chip companies doing actual 1-to-1 advertising agreements) and large publishers (generally run by large media companies) with lots of lawyers involved. Even then, it only gets as legitimate as the arrangement I just described can get.
As soon as you start dealing with CPA or affiliate networks or any of that shit, prepare to see some borderline-criminal activity as a matter of course. Any company who plays in this space as their main/only source of income is bound to be teeming with the scum of the earth. There's good money in it, but you're just ripping suckers off for the most part, which is kind of like most other types of advertising, but even more blatant online.
I don't think anybody's fooled by these companies trying to "clean up" their act, which is good, because they're ultimately the crooks they've always been.
Google is being rather coy about the pricing, merely inviting ISPs and other interested parties to apply and learn more, but does suggest in its product information page that the service will be offered "affordably".
Honestly, nowadays, it's hard to imagine Google being able to price Gmail high enough that ISPs will think they can do it cheaper, better, in-house. Running email services is one of the worst shit jobs you can find in technology. Good, competent people who can actually do it right aren't cheap, because the work sucks. Keeping clueless users safe from spam and viruses (something you're actually expected to do, no matter how much they like to click on.exes from strangers who claim to be selling porno) is labor-intensive, no matter how much you automate it, just keeping up is a bitch. And the storage, CPU, and network resources required to keep things going will be increasing (faster and faster) indefinitely.
Every ISP in the world would be happy to unload their email problems on someone else. I expect Google will find a lot of takers, even if they gouge them a bit. FWIW, at least Gmail gets more things right than most ISPs.
(Note that running your own personal inbound mailserver still isn't that bad. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about large ISPs running mail farms for tens- or hundreds-of-thousands of users. I've been there, and will never touch the shit again. Hell, when I did it things were a lot easier than they are now, because the spam deluge hadn't even really started and users didn't expect all their attachments to be virus-scanned and their mail to be collaboratively filtered.)
Many folks feel that, while copyright is altogether a bad thing, as long as it does exist we should make the best of it by forcing commercial entities -- who grouse about stronger copyright legislation being needed to protect business/"innovation" on the one hand, while shoveling BSD/MIT/Artistic/whatever-licensed code into their products as fast as they can on the other -- onto a level playing field.
Put another way, while you may want to get rid of copyright altogether when you can, if you are writing code now, you might choose the GPL because you don't want your code to put money into the pockets of the very people who will likely be fighting against you for copyright reform/abolition. Once copyright is gone, everybody has to "fight fair", insofar as anyone can be as "dirty" as they want with respect to using others' code without their sanction.
I'm not one who has strong opinions for or against the GPL or BSD -- I see the logic on both sides: so you can choose to live as if there were essentially no copyright, the BSD way, and help your "enemy", or turn the law against the people who use it as a cudgel with the GPL -- but most GPL advocates I have talked to seem to be more of the mind that "I'm not going to let my Open Source code contribute to the bottom line of the very people who have forced us into this proprietary hell in the first place", rather than "I want to 'protect my innovation' by taking advantage of copyright law." More simply, it seems to be a defensive choice more than an offensive one.
Either way, there are people both for and against copyright who choose both licenses regularly. I don't think, ultimately, what you feel about a world where there is no copyright has much to do with what license you choose for software right now. Most projects seem to choose their license with the practical considerations of the system we have in mind, rather than what they might like to see in the future.
It's annoying enough on my 2.33ghz mbp, but it's downright infuriating on my 1ghz pbg4. It may be faster (I don't know, up until I switched to the mbp I just used Office), but it's still dog slow.
Re:Ruby as a first language?
on
Beginning Ruby
·
· Score: 1
That's why God invented editors with brace matching. Stop using ed just because it's the standard.
Re:Enlighten me
on
Beginning Ruby
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Isn't the most important thing in a server side language fast performance rather than quick development time?
Of course not. If it were, every high traffic website would be an NSAPI/ISAPI/Apache module. The vast majority of small to medium scale web apps are database limited much more than they are CPU limited on the web server. Twitter is such an app, as that coding horror article eventually mentions.
As far as whether you should learn it, I get paid to write mostly PHP, and I'd say anybody else in my position should check Rails out just to compare and contrast. If anything, you might pick up a few tricks. I use Rails, and like it, but like any other tool it's not for everything. When I don't use it, I still find myself using Rails-esque constructs in my PHP/Java/whatever web apps, just because they get a lot of things right architecturally.
The iPhone is an ultra-slick high end consumer device. I don't think BMW worries too much about fleet sales of 500-series sedans, either. Yes, Apple is missing a huge market by going in that direction, and perhaps they're also missing the market best suited to paying $500 for a phone, but they're still going to sell a ton of them and make a mint doing it.
When contacted, an Apple Australia spokesperson said: "I am not interested in commenting".
Says it all.
I'd like the iPhone to be an open platform, especially since I'll probably buy one. Even if it was, I just can't see it being an "enterprise" device. Apple's not that company, no matter how much they'd like you to buy an Xserve.
My personal philosophy is to make the entertainment experience of videogames available to everyone. I want to see the audience of people who play videogames, of any type, on any device, include practically anyone on the planet.
Personally, I don't think selling a $500 console is the best way to reach "practically anyone on the planet." In fact, it seems like you're going in the exact opposite direction with each successive console generation.
Congratulations to all the Ubuntu folks who make that project so great. Ubuntu, more than anything else, gives me hope for Linux on the average user's desktop.
Slashdot Mirror
Every college has an entire office dedicated to helping you find money to go there, and the more prestigious a college is, the more money they have to throw at their students in financial aid. Get into a really good school and you'll be able to afford it.
And no, aside from the army nobody's going to give you money to go to college on the condition that you work for them when you get out. That's just silly.
I think I speak for most of the audience of this website when I say "ever since I was six."
I don't know...
I have a pretty big ass.
Fortunately I have a disguise.
Fortunately the calendar stops at 2012.
Some games benefit from levels as a kind of marker for your achievements and progression through the game. Portal is a good example of this, with the levels you have conquered representing the skills and techniques you have mastered.
It's the same thing with RPGs. I've heard the level system criticized as outdated and unnecessary, but looking at someone and being able to say "he's level 20" is a concise way of communicating with other people exactly what kind of player you're talking about.
they show the Stanley cup in full.
Really? I'm not sure anybody shows the full Stanley Cup in the US anymore.
Maybe Food Network?
Of course they'll go further than that...
as soon as they put one on dubs.
Presumably when another user is running a copy.
If you just want to screw with Ruby, CGI works just fine. Not so much for Rails, though (because Rails is, for all its benefits, "teh hueg").
The battery probably didn't even change. The only difference is that the old numbers came from engineering, and the new numbers came from PR :P
(I kid, I kid. I think it's a pretty sweet little device, personally.)
This is one of the few things Safari doesn't do (out of the box) that really bugs me. Sogudi picks up the slack, though.
I still use Firefox most of the time, just because there are a few pages I use a great deal that don't quite work right in Safari.
Indeed. Without going back to the drawing board and attempting to revolutionize MMOs as a whole, you'd have to be stupid not to copy WoW (and by extension EQ and friends). You can say what you want about it, but they've gotten quite a lot right, and I'd be very skeptical of any typical MMO that didn't pull a lot of their ideas straight out of WoW.
"Internet Marketing" and "Online Advertising" are pretty much the most corrupt and shady businesses you can involve yourself with. Seriously, if you're thinking about getting into it, but have some morals, go check out being an arms dealer or something. The only legitimate dealings I've seen in this space are between large advertisers (not networks, I'm talking blue chip companies doing actual 1-to-1 advertising agreements) and large publishers (generally run by large media companies) with lots of lawyers involved. Even then, it only gets as legitimate as the arrangement I just described can get.
As soon as you start dealing with CPA or affiliate networks or any of that shit, prepare to see some borderline-criminal activity as a matter of course. Any company who plays in this space as their main/only source of income is bound to be teeming with the scum of the earth. There's good money in it, but you're just ripping suckers off for the most part, which is kind of like most other types of advertising, but even more blatant online.
I don't think anybody's fooled by these companies trying to "clean up" their act, which is good, because they're ultimately the crooks they've always been.
Honestly, nowadays, it's hard to imagine Google being able to price Gmail high enough that ISPs will think they can do it cheaper, better, in-house. Running email services is one of the worst shit jobs you can find in technology. Good, competent people who can actually do it right aren't cheap, because the work sucks. Keeping clueless users safe from spam and viruses (something you're actually expected to do, no matter how much they like to click on .exes from strangers who claim to be selling porno) is labor-intensive, no matter how much you automate it, just keeping up is a bitch. And the storage, CPU, and network resources required to keep things going will be increasing (faster and faster) indefinitely.
Every ISP in the world would be happy to unload their email problems on someone else. I expect Google will find a lot of takers, even if they gouge them a bit. FWIW, at least Gmail gets more things right than most ISPs.
(Note that running your own personal inbound mailserver still isn't that bad. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about large ISPs running mail farms for tens- or hundreds-of-thousands of users. I've been there, and will never touch the shit again. Hell, when I did it things were a lot easier than they are now, because the spam deluge hadn't even really started and users didn't expect all their attachments to be virus-scanned and their mail to be collaboratively filtered.)
Many folks feel that, while copyright is altogether a bad thing, as long as it does exist we should make the best of it by forcing commercial entities -- who grouse about stronger copyright legislation being needed to protect business/"innovation" on the one hand, while shoveling BSD/MIT/Artistic/whatever-licensed code into their products as fast as they can on the other -- onto a level playing field.
Put another way, while you may want to get rid of copyright altogether when you can, if you are writing code now, you might choose the GPL because you don't want your code to put money into the pockets of the very people who will likely be fighting against you for copyright reform/abolition. Once copyright is gone, everybody has to "fight fair", insofar as anyone can be as "dirty" as they want with respect to using others' code without their sanction.
I'm not one who has strong opinions for or against the GPL or BSD -- I see the logic on both sides: so you can choose to live as if there were essentially no copyright, the BSD way, and help your "enemy", or turn the law against the people who use it as a cudgel with the GPL -- but most GPL advocates I have talked to seem to be more of the mind that "I'm not going to let my Open Source code contribute to the bottom line of the very people who have forced us into this proprietary hell in the first place", rather than "I want to 'protect my innovation' by taking advantage of copyright law." More simply, it seems to be a defensive choice more than an offensive one.
Either way, there are people both for and against copyright who choose both licenses regularly. I don't think, ultimately, what you feel about a world where there is no copyright has much to do with what license you choose for software right now. Most projects seem to choose their license with the practical considerations of the system we have in mind, rather than what they might like to see in the future.
My "personal server" isn't going to be displacing Google until I can get more than 2MB upstream to my house.
Done and done.
It's annoying enough on my 2.33ghz mbp, but it's downright infuriating on my 1ghz pbg4. It may be faster (I don't know, up until I switched to the mbp I just used Office), but it's still dog slow.
That's why God invented editors with brace matching. Stop using ed just because it's the standard.
Of course not. If it were, every high traffic website would be an NSAPI/ISAPI/Apache module. The vast majority of small to medium scale web apps are database limited much more than they are CPU limited on the web server. Twitter is such an app, as that coding horror article eventually mentions.
As far as whether you should learn it, I get paid to write mostly PHP, and I'd say anybody else in my position should check Rails out just to compare and contrast. If anything, you might pick up a few tricks. I use Rails, and like it, but like any other tool it's not for everything. When I don't use it, I still find myself using Rails-esque constructs in my PHP/Java/whatever web apps, just because they get a lot of things right architecturally.
The iPhone is an ultra-slick high end consumer device. I don't think BMW worries too much about fleet sales of 500-series sedans, either. Yes, Apple is missing a huge market by going in that direction, and perhaps they're also missing the market best suited to paying $500 for a phone, but they're still going to sell a ton of them and make a mint doing it.
Says it all.
I'd like the iPhone to be an open platform, especially since I'll probably buy one. Even if it was, I just can't see it being an "enterprise" device. Apple's not that company, no matter how much they'd like you to buy an Xserve.
Personally, I don't think selling a $500 console is the best way to reach "practically anyone on the planet." In fact, it seems like you're going in the exact opposite direction with each successive console generation.
Congratulations to all the Ubuntu folks who make that project so great. Ubuntu, more than anything else, gives me hope for Linux on the average user's desktop.