Research done at MIT shows that tinfoil hats actually amplify government mind control beams. Because they are not fully enclosed, they actually end up acting as a sort of antenna. Yes, that's right: Wearing a tinfoil hat is exactly what the shadow government wants you to do!
Google spends a hell of a lot more resources on improving web search than they do on things like this. You just don't notice because there's nothing to announce when they add a new algorithm to improve quality. Ever hear of the 70/20/10 split? 70% core web search, 20% adjacent projects, 10% crazy stuff.
You can do various tricks to make it seem faster by instruction count at certain things but in the end those same things can be applied to compiled code like c/c++.
I would love to see an implementation of malloc() which looks like:
You can do this in a GC'd language. The GC can move objects around in memory later on to eliminate fragmentation. You obviously cannot do this in C since you cannot freely move memory in C.
Hell, you can even remove the if statement in the above code if you just stick a guard page at the end of the heap. Then you could stick the heap pointer in a register and have heap allocation which is just as fast as stack allocation. Try doing that in C. Hint: You can't.
Finalizers are not destructors! If you are using finalizers like destructors you need to stop doing that. Finalizers are totally non-deterministic. They may never actually run, or they may run long after the object stopped being used. They also kill GC performance. You should almost never use them.
Incidentally, I have never run anti-virus software, and yet I have never had a virus. And I run Windows. And, yes, I would know if I had a virus; I regularly help other people remove viruses from their systems. Of course, the people I help typically are running AV software; little good that did them.
If you're careful about what you install, stay away from Kazaa and warez, and keep an eye on your windows\currentversion\run registry entries, and for god's sake do not open file attachments, you can stay safer than any AV software would make you. AV software generally can only detect viruses it knows about, and you better believe most viruses that exist in the wild are not in the AV companies' databases.
Google has drained the market of talent, caused a 25% to 50% hike in salaries and made it difficult for startups to get funding.
And this is evil... how? If other companies aren't willing to pay as much or provide all the amazing benefits Google does -- or even if other companies just aren't cool enough to attract talent -- isn't that their own fault?
It's like complaining that your competitor is beating you by selling a better product at a lower price. It's called competition!
Plus, I'm sure none of us coders mind being fought for...:)
In my experience, having a lot of OSS work on your resume looks very good to employers. Not only does it show that you have skill, but it shows that you are self-motivated and enjoy your field. You can also demonstrate leadership and management skills through OSS. The ability to see a project through from idea to useful product is a surprisingly rare skill, and open source is a great way to prove that you can do it.
In other words, OSS is a good way for you to break the cache-22 of job hiring, in which you need experience to get a job and you need a job to get experience. OSS projects are much closer to real experience than anything you do in college.
In my case, after graduating with my BS, I spent two years or so developing this. I had no really significant work experience; just some informal unpaid stints with failed startups and a two-month research assistant job. In any case, I finished the above project about three months ago, applied for two jobs, got both of them, and now work at Google.:)
If you weren't actually involved in coding in your projects, that probably won't be as useful, though. Maybe you should get involved while you can.
(Obligatory: This post represents my personal opinions, not Google's, etc.)
I did read some of the patent before my original post. I thought it looked more specific. Now I read more and I'm not sure. So I'm retracting my argument and leaving it at that. Maybe if I read every line I'd return to my original conclusion, or maybe I'd decide it was evil. It's not worth my time.
I tend to have the same comment every time one of these silly patent debates comes up, regardless of whose patent it may be. A lot of the time, people just read the abstract and assume it describes the whole invention, when the actual claims and details cover something far more specific.
Unfortunately, on closer inspection of this one, I'm not as sure about it. I don't have the time to read every line... so I think I'm going to retract my original post and replace it with an "I don't know". If they really did patent the simple idea of inserting ads into RSS, then, yes, that's evil (in my personal opinion). Of course, there's plenty of prior art, so it won't stand up in court.
You know, every time one of these patent debates comes up, the same thing happens: People like you completely misunderstand the meaning of the patent, assume that the patent covers something absurdly broad, then complain about that.
Read the patent. The patent doesn't cover advertising in RSS. The patent covers a specific method for producing RSS ads.
The patent on MP3 compression did not cover compression of digital audio in general. It covered the techniques used in MP3 specifically.
The patent on RSA encryption did not cover the concept of public-key encryption in general. It covered only RSA's specific algorithm.
And this patent does not cover RSS advertising in general. It covers Google's technique for doing it.
(Oblig: IANAL, I haven't read the patent in full detail, and these are my own personal opinions.)
Most Google engineers do not have PhD's, as far as I've seen. All I had was a BS from the U of MN and some open source projects, and they took me quite seriously.
Don't be afraid to submit your resume. If you have talent, Google knows how to recognize it.
(Oblig: These are my words and opinions, not Google's.)
When you first learn Dvorak, you should not do any switching during the process. Wait until it has been a few weeks and you are able to touch-type reasonably fast.
After that, you should be able to switch back and forth as long as you do it. That is, you will need to actually type Qwerty once in awhile to keep your skill fresh. You will probably not be as fast in Qwerty as you were before learning Dvorak, as you will be using Dvorak most of the time and most of your brain will focus on that. But, yes, you should still be able to touch-type in Qwerty.
Personally, I don't bother practicing Qwerty. Any time that I am going to be at a computer for a long period, I just go into the preferences and switch the layout. It only takes 15 seconds. However, in the rare case that I actually have to type Qwerty, what I find is that I type maybe half or 1/3 speed. I do have to look at the keyboard, but I don't do "hunt-and-peck". I type with all my fingers like normal; it's just that I have to actually look as I do it.
Once you have Dvorak down, it's fun to leave your keyboard in Qwerty layout even though your OS is set to Dvorak. Keeps people off your computer.
Corporations which cause a lot of pollution would be hurt by added environmental requirements, since they would have to pay to upgrade their factories, use more expensive techniques, etc.
But, you are absolutely right that this will also create new industries which produce such environmentally-friendly equipment, etc.
What I think the corporations need to do is... innovate in the areas of energy efficiency.
Getting back to the hybrid topic, Toyota is a great example of this. In 1993 (I think) they announced their "Earth charter", which lead to the creation of their hybrid engine. The goal of the project was explicitly to design an environmentally-friendly car. And now it looks like it's paying off for them, big time. In 2000 they announced the beginning of their "New Earth Charter", in which they are researching not just ways to make a car that operates cleanly, but new manufacturing techniques to make it more friendly to build and ways to improve disposal. It sounds like they're really putting a lot of effort into it.
That's quite a spike we see in the last century. Yes, a lot of it was before the 1940's, but another big increase is in the last 20 years. Meanwhile, the last few centuries before this one show much less change.
Please don't say "1 degree is irrelevant". The difference between where we are now and an ice age is about eight degrees.
Another thought: Corporate America has a clear interest in convincing you that global warming is a non-threat. If they succeed at this, they earn more money. On the other hand, environmentalists have no such interest in convincing you of their side. They will not receive more money. In fact, in terms of money, they will probably end up worse-off, due to the economic damage their policies will create. Yet, they persist in arguing their case.
Toyota sells an SUV hybrid (the Highlander). More larger cars will be fitted with hybrid engines soon enough. I even read a rumor that a hybrid Hummer is in the works. I'm sure the target market for such a vehicle is very excited -- both of them.
From what other posters have said, it appears that GoDaddy has fixed this problem since last year when I encountered it. At the time (as of late last year) their expiration warning e-mails said nothing about auto-renewal, but it appears they now do. I am glad they changed that. Please don't mod me up for outdated information. -_-
The notice I received did NOT have that text. I looked over it several times trying to figure out where they had warned me. They must have added that recently.
Slashdot Mirror
Research done at MIT shows that tinfoil hats actually amplify government mind control beams. Because they are not fully enclosed, they actually end up acting as a sort of antenna. Yes, that's right: Wearing a tinfoil hat is exactly what the shadow government wants you to do!
Google spends a hell of a lot more resources on improving web search than they do on things like this. You just don't notice because there's nothing to announce when they add a new algorithm to improve quality. Ever hear of the 70/20/10 split? 70% core web search, 20% adjacent projects, 10% crazy stuff.
you can find all existing pointers and update them. it's not that difficult if you designed your application with this kind of thing in mind.
Would you care to describe how you would do this? I'm having trouble imagining a solution which is not terribly convoluted or inefficient.
offsets remain correct regardless of address.
Unless the objects change location relative to each other, which is the whole point of a compacting memory manager like what I was describing.
Memory pools are nice for applications that fit well with them, but they certainly can't serve as a general replacement for malloc().
Um... last I checked memmove() does not find all existing pointers to the memory in question and update them to point at the new location.
I would love to see an implementation of malloc() which looks like:You can do this in a GC'd language. The GC can move objects around in memory later on to eliminate fragmentation. You obviously cannot do this in C since you cannot freely move memory in C.
Hell, you can even remove the if statement in the above code if you just stick a guard page at the end of the heap. Then you could stick the heap pointer in a register and have heap allocation which is just as fast as stack allocation. Try doing that in C. Hint: You can't.
Finalizers are not destructors! If you are using finalizers like destructors you need to stop doing that. Finalizers are totally non-deterministic. They may never actually run, or they may run long after the object stopped being used. They also kill GC performance. You should almost never use them.
Incidentally, I have never run anti-virus software, and yet I have never had a virus. And I run Windows. And, yes, I would know if I had a virus; I regularly help other people remove viruses from their systems. Of course, the people I help typically are running AV software; little good that did them.
If you're careful about what you install, stay away from Kazaa and warez, and keep an eye on your windows\currentversion\run registry entries, and for god's sake do not open file attachments, you can stay safer than any AV software would make you. AV software generally can only detect viruses it knows about, and you better believe most viruses that exist in the wild are not in the AV companies' databases.
IDN is inherently insecure. I already had it disabled for this reason.
Google has drained the market of talent, caused a 25% to 50% hike in salaries and made it difficult for startups to get funding.
:)
And this is evil... how? If other companies aren't willing to pay as much or provide all the amazing benefits Google does -- or even if other companies just aren't cool enough to attract talent -- isn't that their own fault?
It's like complaining that your competitor is beating you by selling a better product at a lower price. It's called competition!
Plus, I'm sure none of us coders mind being fought for...
In my experience, having a lot of OSS work on your resume looks very good to employers. Not only does it show that you have skill, but it shows that you are self-motivated and enjoy your field. You can also demonstrate leadership and management skills through OSS. The ability to see a project through from idea to useful product is a surprisingly rare skill, and open source is a great way to prove that you can do it.
:)
In other words, OSS is a good way for you to break the cache-22 of job hiring, in which you need experience to get a job and you need a job to get experience. OSS projects are much closer to real experience than anything you do in college.
In my case, after graduating with my BS, I spent two years or so developing this. I had no really significant work experience; just some informal unpaid stints with failed startups and a two-month research assistant job. In any case, I finished the above project about three months ago, applied for two jobs, got both of them, and now work at Google.
If you weren't actually involved in coding in your projects, that probably won't be as useful, though. Maybe you should get involved while you can.
(Obligatory: This post represents my personal opinions, not Google's, etc.)
I did read some of the patent before my original post. I thought it looked more specific. Now I read more and I'm not sure. So I'm retracting my argument and leaving it at that. Maybe if I read every line I'd return to my original conclusion, or maybe I'd decide it was evil. It's not worth my time.
I tend to have the same comment every time one of these silly patent debates comes up, regardless of whose patent it may be. A lot of the time, people just read the abstract and assume it describes the whole invention, when the actual claims and details cover something far more specific.
Unfortunately, on closer inspection of this one, I'm not as sure about it. I don't have the time to read every line... so I think I'm going to retract my original post and replace it with an "I don't know". If they really did patent the simple idea of inserting ads into RSS, then, yes, that's evil (in my personal opinion). Of course, there's plenty of prior art, so it won't stand up in court.
You know, every time one of these patent debates comes up, the same thing happens: People like you completely misunderstand the meaning of the patent, assume that the patent covers something absurdly broad, then complain about that.
Read the patent. The patent doesn't cover advertising in RSS. The patent covers a specific method for producing RSS ads.
The patent on MP3 compression did not cover compression of digital audio in general. It covered the techniques used in MP3 specifically.
The patent on RSA encryption did not cover the concept of public-key encryption in general. It covered only RSA's specific algorithm.
And this patent does not cover RSS advertising in general. It covers Google's technique for doing it.
(Oblig: IANAL, I haven't read the patent in full detail, and these are my own personal opinions.)
Most Google engineers do not have PhD's, as far as I've seen. All I had was a BS from the U of MN and some open source projects, and they took me quite seriously.
Don't be afraid to submit your resume. If you have talent, Google knows how to recognize it.
(Oblig: These are my words and opinions, not Google's.)
Free high quality lunches instead of reducing lunch hours etc as many presently try to do.
Don't forget breakfast and dinner! I do so love the omelets...
Indeed. We have much more important things to do than post here.
...
Dammit.
If the shoe was on the other foot, and a Google employee went to Microsoft
Non-compete clauses are illegal in California, where Google is based.
When you first learn Dvorak, you should not do any switching during the process. Wait until it has been a few weeks and you are able to touch-type reasonably fast.
After that, you should be able to switch back and forth as long as you do it. That is, you will need to actually type Qwerty once in awhile to keep your skill fresh. You will probably not be as fast in Qwerty as you were before learning Dvorak, as you will be using Dvorak most of the time and most of your brain will focus on that. But, yes, you should still be able to touch-type in Qwerty.
Personally, I don't bother practicing Qwerty. Any time that I am going to be at a computer for a long period, I just go into the preferences and switch the layout. It only takes 15 seconds. However, in the rare case that I actually have to type Qwerty, what I find is that I type maybe half or 1/3 speed. I do have to look at the keyboard, but I don't do "hunt-and-peck". I type with all my fingers like normal; it's just that I have to actually look as I do it.
Once you have Dvorak down, it's fun to leave your keyboard in Qwerty layout even though your OS is set to Dvorak. Keeps people off your computer.
Corporations which cause a lot of pollution would be hurt by added environmental requirements, since they would have to pay to upgrade their factories, use more expensive techniques, etc.
... innovate in the areas of energy efficiency.
:(
But, you are absolutely right that this will also create new industries which produce such environmentally-friendly equipment, etc.
What I think the corporations need to do is
Getting back to the hybrid topic, Toyota is a great example of this. In 1993 (I think) they announced their "Earth charter", which lead to the creation of their hybrid engine. The goal of the project was explicitly to design an environmentally-friendly car. And now it looks like it's paying off for them, big time. In 2000 they announced the beginning of their "New Earth Charter", in which they are researching not just ways to make a car that operates cleanly, but new manufacturing techniques to make it more friendly to build and ways to improve disposal. It sounds like they're really putting a lot of effort into it.
Some more details.
Meanwhile, car companies here in America are innovating in entirely different directions.
Please refer to the second graph here.
That's quite a spike we see in the last century. Yes, a lot of it was before the 1940's, but another big increase is in the last 20 years. Meanwhile, the last few centuries before this one show much less change.
Please don't say "1 degree is irrelevant". The difference between where we are now and an ice age is about eight degrees.
Another thought: Corporate America has a clear interest in convincing you that global warming is a non-threat. If they succeed at this, they earn more money. On the other hand, environmentalists have no such interest in convincing you of their side. They will not receive more money. In fact, in terms of money, they will probably end up worse-off, due to the economic damage their policies will create. Yet, they persist in arguing their case.
Who do you trust?
Toyota sells an SUV hybrid (the Highlander). More larger cars will be fitted with hybrid engines soon enough. I even read a rumor that a hybrid Hummer is in the works. I'm sure the target market for such a vehicle is very excited -- both of them.
(I get my Prius on Wednesday! Woohoo!)
The reminders, at the time, said that my service would expire in 90/60/30 days, with no mention of auto-renew.
However, it appears they have made their e-mails more informative since then.
From what other posters have said, it appears that GoDaddy has fixed this problem since last year when I encountered it. At the time (as of late last year) their expiration warning e-mails said nothing about auto-renewal, but it appears they now do. I am glad they changed that. Please don't mod me up for outdated information. -_-
The notice I received did NOT have that text. I looked over it several times trying to figure out where they had warned me. They must have added that recently.
I'm glad they fixed the problem.