Ya know, cause I like hats. And doors piss me off when they don't open.
Congratulations to Apple for embracing an infomercial sales pitch -- it opens doors! it can bake a cheesecake perfect every time! do you want an omelet?! presto!
China has always wanted to build market share for Baidu. The general Chinese diagram of the world ("Us" vs "Barbarians") has never and will never change.
The few times I've tried to pitch web apps to clients as a genuine replacement for desktop apps, they've glared at me like I was threatening to kill their favorite dog.
The "problem" is what do you do if you do not have your own library of functions written?
I don't view myself as a hardcore coder by any means. I actually came to PHP from a college background geared more toward design, although I had coded some BASIC, Pascal, C and C++ as a kid. What I realized almost instantly when I got into the real world is that almost any system that prepped anything for you in advance has glaring limitations.
And that goes all the way from learning that FrontPage sucks to learning that server-side includes suck all the way down to learning that frameworks are limiting.
And, yes, I understand from experience there's a point where you're going too low-level. Hell, I've coded stuff in assembly (great learning experience, not peculiarly practically on a daily basis for most folks).
For me, coding most stuff from scratch in PHP while keeping a few libraries of my own code that handle everyday stuff (SQL connects; scrubbing POSTs, GETs, cookies, files, etc.; money conversions; date conversions) was where the balance was struck.
I admit, I code a lot of PHP. And I have never felt the need to take a serious look at using any frameworks. Isn't the entire point of PHP that it makes a great rapid development platform?
Most languages sort of enforce a framework whether you like it or not. Not BASIC.
When I was a kid and I learned BASIC, I thought it was hot shit. And I didn't have a great amount of trouble learning Pascal.
But, when I got older and I started programming in C++ and eventually in PHP, I noticed that almost nothing from BASIC carried over. If it weren't for iterative loops, I think there would be nothing of value to come out of BASIC in learning other languages. Even in Visual BASIC, it's astonishing the number of times you end up using a C-like structure just because that's what works best.
The only thing BASIC really does is offer an easy gateway into programming. Is that good enough? I don't know.
It's been so long since I have used Windows for a server. I can see my last Windows server, a whopping 300 MHz killing machine, sitting at the bottom of a shelf in my office, waiting for the day I finally blank the hard drive and send it off to the Solid Waste Authority.
There was that inkling in the back of my head, but I had to read on for it to move forward in my brain.
And many of us think of our car keys and our credit / debit cards the same way.
And I'm sorry, but the clone-ability of stripe systems isn't anywhere in the ballpark of the clone-ability of RFID. It's not an apples-to-apples comparison at all. With a stripe card system, you at least have to physical take the card or compromise a database. With RFID there are already too many exploits that take advantage of passerbys. And given the very bad tendency of companies like Apple and MS to leave system in an always on state, I'm not thrilled at the idea they're going to protect my keys.
"the rest of life is about being a more interesting person capable of enjoying a wider breadth of experience"
Why does Lolcatz not make me a more interesting person?
In all seriousness, the article's proposal is this: on a scale of quality papyrus > hand writing > typing > word processing > Photoshopping "i'z pays atenshun" onto a photo of a cat.
I'm sorry, but the notion that anything written today is almost by default worse than anything written 100 to 500 years ago is elitist bullshit. He's saying that letting the average moron -- the same guy who has always been there -- express himself dilutes our intellect, because it allows the average moron to compete with the above average moron.
Each increment in technology increases the likelihood that information will spread. And the rate at which a civilization improves is linked to the rate at which it can share information.
Think of the radical difference there is between the day when getting a copy of a book involved learning Latin (years) and then finding a monastery with the book you wanted (years) and then copying the book by hand yourself (months to years) to today when that book exists available at a moment's notice in the ether. It's mind-numbingly dumb to act like any of this is bad.
And, yes, a few Lolcatz happen along the way.
The problem is this unending belief humans have that everything old and traditional is better. "It was a dark and stormy night" was written two centuries ago. It wasn't written on a blog or using a word processor.
I have a whole littany of this crap in my head -- all crap that pre-dates the word processor -- and none of it has done me a fat lot of good better than being Rickrolled.
Considering the relative ease with which RFID has been hacked, and how long it took for Bluetooth to become only reasonably secure, and how far off good wireless security is . ..
And that's the discussion you go through before you get to "stupid people."
And let's not even have the "If software can't keep gas pedals from sticking, what will it do for door locks."
I'm an opponent of the excessive and unnecessary desire to expand technology into areas where an existing technology already does a better job.
Slashdot Mirror
Ya know, cause I like hats. And doors piss me off when they don't open.
Congratulations to Apple for embracing an infomercial sales pitch -- it opens doors! it can bake a cheesecake perfect every time! do you want an omelet?! presto!
China has always wanted to build market share for Baidu. The general Chinese diagram of the world ("Us" vs "Barbarians") has never and will never change.
And I don't care how good she is, "stellar" is just too strong of an adjective.
The few times I've tried to pitch web apps to clients as a genuine replacement for desktop apps, they've glared at me like I was threatening to kill their favorite dog.
And so will disappear the last sign than man was ever here.
My lack of mod points right now pains me.
Man, I hate it when I see the 20-80 rule, because now I know it's bullshit.
I don't view myself as a hardcore coder by any means. I actually came to PHP from a college background geared more toward design, although I had coded some BASIC, Pascal, C and C++ as a kid. What I realized almost instantly when I got into the real world is that almost any system that prepped anything for you in advance has glaring limitations.
And that goes all the way from learning that FrontPage sucks to learning that server-side includes suck all the way down to learning that frameworks are limiting.
And, yes, I understand from experience there's a point where you're going too low-level. Hell, I've coded stuff in assembly (great learning experience, not peculiarly practically on a daily basis for most folks).
For me, coding most stuff from scratch in PHP while keeping a few libraries of my own code that handle everyday stuff (SQL connects; scrubbing POSTs, GETs, cookies, files, etc.; money conversions; date conversions) was where the balance was struck.
I admit, I code a lot of PHP. And I have never felt the need to take a serious look at using any frameworks. Isn't the entire point of PHP that it makes a great rapid development platform?
Wow. How often will you ever read that outside of a police report about a domestic dispute?
Somehow I don't feel I'm missing much. I think I would have been more impressed if Tim Allen were pimping a Galaxy Quest MMO.
FUUUUUUCK!
Most languages sort of enforce a framework whether you like it or not. Not BASIC.
When I was a kid and I learned BASIC, I thought it was hot shit. And I didn't have a great amount of trouble learning Pascal.
But, when I got older and I started programming in C++ and eventually in PHP, I noticed that almost nothing from BASIC carried over. If it weren't for iterative loops, I think there would be nothing of value to come out of BASIC in learning other languages. Even in Visual BASIC, it's astonishing the number of times you end up using a C-like structure just because that's what works best.
The only thing BASIC really does is offer an easy gateway into programming. Is that good enough? I don't know.
Top tier: i7, for hardcore graphics needs on a single station.
Middle tier: Core 2 Quad, for large-scale, multi-system computation.
Bottom tier: Pentium Dual Core (Wolfdale), for all general purpose, gaming and media center PCs.
I actually love the 2.8 GHz Wolfdales. Easy to OC.
I'm outraged. Absolutely outraged. This is unprecedented. Unheard of.
It's been so long since I have used Windows for a server. I can see my last Windows server, a whopping 300 MHz killing machine, sitting at the bottom of a shelf in my office, waiting for the day I finally blank the hard drive and send it off to the Solid Waste Authority.
There was that inkling in the back of my head, but I had to read on for it to move forward in my brain.
How did I end up in this article? Ah!!!
OMFG! There's swinging at an outside pitch and there's try to hit one that was thrown in the fuckin' stands!!
Dammit. I messed up the joke. Thanks for correcting it, man.
And many of us think of our car keys and our credit / debit cards the same way.
And I'm sorry, but the clone-ability of stripe systems isn't anywhere in the ballpark of the clone-ability of RFID. It's not an apples-to-apples comparison at all. With a stripe card system, you at least have to physical take the card or compromise a database. With RFID there are already too many exploits that take advantage of passerbys. And given the very bad tendency of companies like Apple and MS to leave system in an always on state, I'm not thrilled at the idea they're going to protect my keys.
I had to read the article to see it was Windows only . . . whew.
You've used an iPhone. But, have you ever used an iPhone . . . high?
"the rest of life is about being a more interesting person capable of enjoying a wider breadth of experience"
Why does Lolcatz not make me a more interesting person?
In all seriousness, the article's proposal is this: on a scale of quality papyrus > hand writing > typing > word processing > Photoshopping "i'z pays atenshun" onto a photo of a cat.
I'm sorry, but the notion that anything written today is almost by default worse than anything written 100 to 500 years ago is elitist bullshit. He's saying that letting the average moron -- the same guy who has always been there -- express himself dilutes our intellect, because it allows the average moron to compete with the above average moron.
Each increment in technology increases the likelihood that information will spread. And the rate at which a civilization improves is linked to the rate at which it can share information.
Think of the radical difference there is between the day when getting a copy of a book involved learning Latin (years) and then finding a monastery with the book you wanted (years) and then copying the book by hand yourself (months to years) to today when that book exists available at a moment's notice in the ether. It's mind-numbingly dumb to act like any of this is bad.
And, yes, a few Lolcatz happen along the way.
The problem is this unending belief humans have that everything old and traditional is better. "It was a dark and stormy night" was written two centuries ago. It wasn't written on a blog or using a word processor.
I have a whole littany of this crap in my head -- all crap that pre-dates the word processor -- and none of it has done me a fat lot of good better than being Rickrolled.
Considering the relative ease with which RFID has been hacked, and how long it took for Bluetooth to become only reasonably secure, and how far off good wireless security is . . .
And that's the discussion you go through before you get to "stupid people."
And let's not even have the "If software can't keep gas pedals from sticking, what will it do for door locks."
I'm an opponent of the excessive and unnecessary desire to expand technology into areas where an existing technology already does a better job.
A universal key could never lead to bad things.