Re:So... this list isn't about the content?
on
Top 50 DVDs
·
· Score: 1
Actually, I buy Robert Rodriguez and Kevin Smith films on DVDs because they come with commentaries from the director (and often others) which are genuinely entertaining and/or insightful.
El Mariachi isn't a good enough film to own on DVD. Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back definitely isn't. I own both; the commentaries did it for me.
Similarly I own True Romance on VHS. I also own the unrated uncut version with all the extras on DVD. I bought it because it adds a lot of value beyond the simple VHS version.
Of course, True Romance, Brazil, Clerks.. these are all films good enough to buy anyway - but the extras are entertaining.
Incidentally, I'm waiting for the 'full extras special edition' versions of Kill Bill vols 1 and 2 to come out before I buy that on DVD - we _know_ they'll come out eventually, and I _know_ I'll want those shiny extras. http://www5.cd-wow.com/detail_results_2.php?produc t_code=13044 is interesting me, but I'll wait to see if the R1 & 2 versions are different.
~Cederic
Re:I think he means expectation of sales
on
Top 50 DVDs
·
· Score: 1
>> Sure, it's got lots of interesting extras, but so does practically every other disc on the market these days.
Sorry, no. Most DVDs do not come out with two versions of the film, a full length documentary, two audio commentaries (recorded 7-8 years apart), or even a fraction of the extras on the Clerks X DVDs.
This list was highlighting those DVDs where you get the best value for money. In terms of sheer entertainment there is easily enough on these discs to put them in a top 50.
just to add to the comments already pointing out various BBC online mentions of the US military aiding Tsunami affected areas, it's been mentioned multiple times on BBC Radio 5, a national broadcaster, which has reported on the US Carrier group, its large number of helicopters, the fact that the US aren't including the cost of that carrier group in their committed aid budget, and that one of the helicopters crashed with injuries to two of the eight people on board.
So over the course of a few days I've found out about this activity from the BBC - hardly a black-out on coverage of the US Navy.
Of course, they've also covered the commitment of a Royal Navy frigate and a fleet auxilary vessel to the area, and had a stunning amount of coverage including live interviews with people in the region (UK nationals, reporters and many many native citizens of the affected countries) and reported on the reaction from Europe, Japan and (oddly enough) the US.
That's odd. I use Windows at home. You know what? It just works for me.
I don't get viruses. I don't get adware. I don't get random flakiness.
Maybe it's because I continually use the web, obsessively read email, run an intentionally open wireless network? Or maybe it's because I'm not a fucking muppet.
Don't slag off the OS if people don't know how to use it efficiently. Trust me, if 90% of PC owners ran Linux they'd have a malware infested unstable operating system within weeks.
Now I'll concede that using the provided tools (i.e. IE and Outlook Express) will cause problems, and that probably is Microsoft's fault. But knowing they're shite and using them anyway? That's user error.
~Cederic
Re:Designed for throw-a-way car market
on
Reinventing the Wheel
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
MOT = Ministry of Transport in the UK. So an MOT test is one done under their auspices.
ABS not working doesn't prevent operation of normal brakes, which is why I'm still driving around happily. It does however leave a warning light on the dashboard - instant MOT failure.
ABS replacement system is nearer £500, including fitting here in the UK. So nearer $900.
My car (Citroen Xantia) has hydraulic silly suspension. Assume approx $1000-1500 to get it replaced - again, including labour. Again, warning lights on the dashboard (in fact, two, one of which is a full three inches by one inch in size and says STOP in the middle). Obviously if I didn't think the suspension could keep the car stable and steady I wouldn't be driving it; the MOT test doesn't attempt such judgements.
Oil leak looks like the cylinder head gasket. That's going to be $1100-1600 to get sorted. You may be right, that might not cause MOT failure; I'm not sure. It is however something I'd want fixing if I intended to keep the vehicle.
There are other issues with the car too (it'll need new brake pads, maybe disks for the MOT, new tyres on the front, who knows what random other faults) none of which will be cheap.
So yeah, it's blinking expensive to fix if you lack the skill/desire to do it yourself. And yes, those quotes are from an independent mechanic.
As for the MOT being excessive Gov't interference: I like that the Government are forcing people to keep their vehicles in a roadworthy condition - otherwise there'd be idiots driving around in cars that leak oil all over the place, that can't stop safely, that have no grip on their types, whose suspension is liable to collapse at high speed. Not to mention the other things that are checked (working lights, chassis properly welded and not rusted through, wheels attached to car, etc).
>> It will eventually lead to having to recycle your car about every 10 years.
We're already mostly there in the UK.
I have a car first registered in 1994. To get through its MOT (annual Gov't safety check) will cost me approx. $3k, due to the oil leak, the ABS brakes being broken, the suspension needing replacing, and a few other things.
If I have all that work done, the car will be worth approx. $800.
Financially it just does not make sense to repair that car. I'm better off trading it in for $200 and buying another car - I can get an equivalent model that's 5-6 years old for not much more than $3k. And that'll last me for a few years more.
(I'm actually spending nearer $19k and buying a very very nice car that's 3 years old, but that was a matter of personal preference).
I don't drive the way you do. I get through brand new good quality tires in six months.
That may be because I accelerate/brake harder, because of road conditions here, because I don't keep them at the correct pressure, or because I have lots of fun going round the bends on the backroads where I live in four-wheel slides.
Something that gives me better lateral control with increased life is definitely of interest. If it avoids flat tires (one reason I need new tires so often) then so much the better!
Heh. On one mud, in Jan/Feb '92, the rules were, PvP only within a 5 level range, none under level 5, and level 5 and under were the only ones allowed in the newbie area.
So I create a character, get him to level five, give him very very good armour and weapon in the (my friends and I were amongst 3-4 of the top 10 players on the mud) and went killing.
Found a high level that was twinking his friend, and had actually given that friend the best armour/weapon in the game. Friend wimpies away from monster, I kill him, suddenly I have best weapon/armour going.
Another chap challenged me to a fight, and twinked his level 10 second-char with decent kit. Foolishly he didn't check my equipment first; one dead char happened.
There was a player guild with the ability to PvP outside the normal level range, but whenever they went for me I'd flee to the newbie area, or just move around the mud so fast they got left behind. So it became pointless for them to try. I'd tease them by running into their guild, patting them on the head and running out again.
Eventually the admin created a level five, boosted its stats, and came hunting me. They were healing it as they went along, when I ran off they'd teleport it in, and he still didn't kill me. But I did log off, as there wasn't really any chance of a fair fight.
I'm not sure to what extent you'd call it griefing. I didn't strictly break any game rules (except the one on 'second chars') and the couple of times that character did die I didn't abuse the people that got me (congratulated them generally). I just explored the limits of the game rules and made life much more interesting for everybody.
I don't think I'm remotely in the same league as Fansy though:)
In theory, software patents are not permitted in Europe.
In practice, they are granted.
So yes, the EPO should check for obviousness, etc. But they don't. They're brain dead. It's incredibly difficult for a patent examiner to understand computer based concepts - what's blatantly obvious to me may seem an incredibly gifted piece of innovation to him.
And yes, software patents are granted on ideas.
> The same benefit that all other forms have technology have received. Increased incentives to improve, increased incentives to try other options that wouldn't be funded or tried if not for a blocking patent.
Sorry, the software industry needs additional incentives. Oh, of course - we've stopped innovating, there's no new software technology being devised, written, implemented. We don't need patents, we're doing extremely well without them and it would be stupid to grant them under such conditions.
~Cederic ps: could you please preview next time? your comment was tricky to read.
> Now I write a new computer program to efficiently sort a database.
[...]
> Aren't I entitled to the same type of protection?
Except that software patents are given for the idea of sorting a database, not for the specific implementation. That's equivalent to patenting sorting apples, not patenting a given mechanical machine for doing so.
Further than that, proving non-obviousness is nigh on impossible. So the patent office doesn't try. Yet to any experienced software engineer, many database sorting mechanisms are obvious.
Add to that, if you hold a patent for an apple sorting machine, that gives you the ability to monopolise efficient apple sorting (until someone devises a competitive alternative).
If you hold a patent for database sorting, nobody else can sort databases. You've just crippled every industry in the country that uses databases; that's the IT industry, finance, telecomms, travel, manufacturing, oil, and pretty much everything else. And nobody will devise a competitive alternative because you've patented the idea, not the implementation. So nobody will extend the sorting to optimise it, simplify it, take it into new areas - in other words, innovation is being prevented.
So no, I don't agree that you are entitled to the same protection. It just isn't needed. Look how far the software industry has come in the last 50 years, without software patents, and look what it's provided, and please, tell me exactly what benefit there is to society from introducing them?
Thing is, if you leave aside the moral implications of their hack, it's still a very fine piece of hacking.
Add in that almost nobody will know the entry code for a free ride, that 9 out of 10 bikes are untouched, the main cost to the 'victim' is the cost of reflashing the hacked bikes. And that wont take too long.
I'm not saying I support this precise piece of hacking, but I do love that people are still getting up to this sort of thing. It's a healthy thing for society.
And stay the fuck out of the argument. It's American cunts like you that funded the bombs that forced me to spend too many years of my life checking under my car before I got into it.
If you want to get people into adult board games who don't normally play them, Munchkin (or its variants) is a great way in.
It's incredibly simple to learn, very well balanced, actually requires you to screw people over (and so takes away the resentment that might otherwise cause) and is just darn good fun.
The other good game for drawing people in to intelligent board games is Settlers of Catan (mentioned elsewhere in this thread). This is great for getting girls interested - it's entirely non-combative, which for some reason appeals to them.;)
My archery club is building a new roof over our cooking area in the woods we use for archery.
More precisely, one club member and his son are building it. The rest of us stand around underneath talking about his great contribution and passing up cups of coffee to them.
This chap is a very gruff, down to earth, no nonsense sort of person. Soft skills are things he's never heard of, would scoff at.
When putting up the roof, he wanted to use Pythagoras theorem. Only, he asked us, "Is it 3-4-5? the triangle thing?"
We said yes, pulled out our PDAs and other portable calculation devices and chatted about trig at school. He got on with building a roof.
So yes, even "average" people need mathematics to some degree or other.
Thing is, if the spyware is installed because you're installing Kazaa, or advertisement support software, or because it promised funky functionality you wanted (the "ooh, pretty mouse pointers" approach) then you have given permission (implicit or explicit, intentional or otherwise) for it to be there.
I'd be interested to see the arguments in a legal case about the implied consent arising from visiting a web page too..
This doesn't excuse worms and email viruses, all of which I think you'll find do get prosecuted.
As for legislating against malware, I think such a law could be exceedingly difficult to word - trying to catch genuine malware as compared to "software with nasty bits included" (consider MMORPGs which monitor your PC for hacks and other cheats and reports back on them) or indeed genuine "legitimate" adware (such as 'free' Opera or Download Accelerator Plus.
I'm personally working to educate family and friends so they do think critically before installing random stuff, so they do check regularly with the usual tools, and so they do switch away from IE/Outlook for their web and mail needs.
Oh man. You shoulda played EQ. It can take 8-10 hours to get back to your corpse, and by the time you get there, everything you'd originally killed to make it that far has respawned and after your now unarmoured and vulnerable self.
You really learn to not like dying so much you give up and find a game that actually rewards risk taking and exploration.
In 1999 a system went live at the BBC that allowed them to search metadata on all their video archives.
I mean, ALL. Even the old stuff - 1870s, IIRC.
They had a big (stonking) database which held the metadata (right down to the equivalent of "This image clip is of Princess Diana wearing a blue dress and kissing a baby"), which was extracted and put into a proper document search engine.
A web front-end was created that performed used the document search engine to get a list of results, then did a lookup to the original database to get the reference for the video clip in question.
Said reference telling you where on which shelf of which row of which large shed to go and look for the video tape/film reel/wax cylinder that contains the clip in question.
Darn good system, reasonably good performance, sucky technology (java applet using CORBA to connect to Java server, HTTP to connect to document search engine, JDBC to connect to original data source).
I suspect it's due to UK labour laws - it's certainly not possible to make someone redundant if their role still exists; it could be argued that the role does still exist, and so they must be allowed to continue in it.
It just happens that the role is now in India not in the UK.
Since handover to the Indian company will occur prior to the role transferral there's no incentive for the Indian's to retain the current UK staff, so they'll probably make it very very attractive to take a redundancy package (based on the "Substantial change to role" caused by the change in location)
I'm happy to admit, I'm not fully au fait with the legalities, I'm just amused by the concept. Personally my role isn't one of those going (I'm merely at risk from our 25% headcount reduction which is also happening at the same time) so it's pretty academic for me.
The large corporation I work for is currently outsourcing all UK development to India.
One interesting facet is that people whose roles are being relocated to India have the option of joining the Indian company involved. Their role would still be in India, and so they would be based there, but they would keep their UK salary.
We're all currently discussing: - how good your standard of living would be in India on a UK salary - how long it would take for the Indian company to make you redundant (currently guess: 4 hours) - what the Indian employment laws are like
The point of the original poster being that the optimisation/recompilation done with Java is done on-the-fly during execution, and thus matching the data being processed.
This is not something done in a statically compiled C/C++ program. Profile-guided optimisation in MSVC may help, but again, you don't necessarily have access to your full data set at compile-time and so you wont necessarily benefit from the full optimisation possible.
As for bounds checking, one reason I like Java is that it does it for me. If it didn't I'd have to do it myself - so it's going to happen anyway, so no speed differential there. Sure you can choose _when_ you bounds check in C/C++, but unfortunately some people optimise out the checking entirely, leading to those lovely buffer overflows that cause so many bugs..
I'm not trying to argue that Java is quicker than C/C++ - the cost of the hardware for either is considerably less than the development costs saved by going with a Java solution. Working in an Enterprise environment total cost matters, and hardware is just a small percentage of that cost.
To get back on topic, that makes LAMP laughable as an alternative to J2EE. Sure, you have a nice horizontally scalable architecture - but that's buying extra hardware to run quicker. And that's different to a clustered J2EE solution precisely how..? LAMP may well be a good solution, and make it LAOJ (Oracle and Java) and it's quite likely to be entering the Enterprise market pretty darn soon (as all four of those elements are already in common use; grid enabling them being the next logical step). But don't sell it to me as a J2EE killer - sell it to me on a total cost basis, and don't forget to include the cost of training, of maintenance, of licenses, of up-front development, of operational support, indeed, of hardware.
I can do things with frames (and especially with iframes) that I can't do otherwise in HTML.
Admittedly this is because my personal HTML skills suck - I learned HTML in 1993 and haven't really caught up since..
However, the websites my company does its selling on are written by very proficient HTML developers and they still use iframes. They do so because it's the best tool for achieving their aims.
So feel free to stop using frames, even iframes, and block sites that require them. Just don't expect many sites to work afterwards.
Of course, that wont stop you getting hit by malicious banner ads. You'll need to block those or switch browser whether you accept frames or not..
- We have multiple websites selling direct to the customer - The websites all connect to our back-end inventory system - Some websites connect through to a bank to process credit cards - Some websites connect through to a fulfilment system (others rely on the inventory system's connection to a different fulfillment system) - The call centre apps connect to the same inventory and fulfillment systems - A shop network connects through to the same inventory and fulfillment systems - Various back-end systems connect to all these systems to provide MI and financial reports - Those back-end systems connect to the accounting system to provide comparison info - The accounting system is connected to the credit card payments systems via the bank
So either we don't provide websites, or we don't link those websites to our existing systems (which, given we're selling a limited resource, would prevent us accurately knowing our inventory available to sell), or we don't take payment online, or we end up with a navigable link from Internet to Accounting system.
Having said that, there are firewalls, switches, various independent networks (isolated by more firewalls and switches), etc.
It's a trade-off between risk and enabling the business. We have minimal risk from our current set-up, and it vastly improves our ability to generate turnover and earn income.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, I buy Robert Rodriguez and Kevin Smith films on DVDs because they come with commentaries from the director (and often others) which are genuinely entertaining and/or insightful.
El Mariachi isn't a good enough film to own on DVD. Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back definitely isn't. I own both; the commentaries did it for me.
Similarly I own True Romance on VHS. I also own the unrated uncut version with all the extras on DVD. I bought it because it adds a lot of value beyond the simple VHS version.
Of course, True Romance, Brazil, Clerks.. these are all films good enough to buy anyway - but the extras are entertaining.
Incidentally, I'm waiting for the 'full extras special edition' versions of Kill Bill vols 1 and 2 to come out before I buy that on DVD - we _know_ they'll come out eventually, and I _know_ I'll want those shiny extras. http://www5.cd-wow.com/detail_results_2.php?produ
~Cederic
>> Sure, it's got lots of interesting extras, but so does practically every other disc on the market these days.
Sorry, no. Most DVDs do not come out with two versions of the film, a full length documentary, two audio commentaries (recorded 7-8 years apart), or even a fraction of the extras on the Clerks X DVDs.
This list was highlighting those DVDs where you get the best value for money. In terms of sheer entertainment there is easily enough on these discs to put them in a top 50.
It's not a bad film either
~Cederic
just to add to the comments already pointing out various BBC online mentions of the US military aiding Tsunami affected areas, it's been mentioned multiple times on BBC Radio 5, a national broadcaster, which has reported on the US Carrier group, its large number of helicopters, the fact that the US aren't including the cost of that carrier group in their committed aid budget, and that one of the helicopters crashed with injuries to two of the eight people on board.
So over the course of a few days I've found out about this activity from the BBC - hardly a black-out on coverage of the US Navy.
Of course, they've also covered the commitment of a Royal Navy frigate and a fleet auxilary vessel to the area, and had a stunning amount of coverage including live interviews with people in the region (UK nationals, reporters and many many native citizens of the affected countries) and reported on the reaction from Europe, Japan and (oddly enough) the US.
Hardly an anti-US bias.
~Cederic
That's odd. I use Windows at home. You know what? It just works for me.
I don't get viruses.
I don't get adware.
I don't get random flakiness.
Maybe it's because I continually use the web, obsessively read email, run an intentionally open wireless network? Or maybe it's because I'm not a fucking muppet.
Don't slag off the OS if people don't know how to use it efficiently. Trust me, if 90% of PC owners ran Linux they'd have a malware infested unstable operating system within weeks.
Now I'll concede that using the provided tools (i.e. IE and Outlook Express) will cause problems, and that probably is Microsoft's fault. But knowing they're shite and using them anyway? That's user error.
~Cederic
MOT = Ministry of Transport in the UK. So an MOT test is one done under their auspices.
ABS not working doesn't prevent operation of normal brakes, which is why I'm still driving around happily. It does however leave a warning light on the dashboard - instant MOT failure.
ABS replacement system is nearer £500, including fitting here in the UK. So nearer $900.
My car (Citroen Xantia) has hydraulic silly suspension. Assume approx $1000-1500 to get it replaced - again, including labour. Again, warning lights on the dashboard (in fact, two, one of which is a full three inches by one inch in size and says STOP in the middle). Obviously if I didn't think the suspension could keep the car stable and steady I wouldn't be driving it; the MOT test doesn't attempt such judgements.
Oil leak looks like the cylinder head gasket. That's going to be $1100-1600 to get sorted. You may be right, that might not cause MOT failure; I'm not sure. It is however something I'd want fixing if I intended to keep the vehicle.
There are other issues with the car too (it'll need new brake pads, maybe disks for the MOT, new tyres on the front, who knows what random other faults) none of which will be cheap.
So yeah, it's blinking expensive to fix if you lack the skill/desire to do it yourself. And yes, those quotes are from an independent mechanic.
As for the MOT being excessive Gov't interference: I like that the Government are forcing people to keep their vehicles in a roadworthy condition - otherwise there'd be idiots driving around in cars that leak oil all over the place, that can't stop safely, that have no grip on their types, whose suspension is liable to collapse at high speed. Not to mention the other things that are checked (working lights, chassis properly welded and not rusted through, wheels attached to car, etc).
~Cederic
>> It will eventually lead to having to recycle your car about every 10 years.
We're already mostly there in the UK.
I have a car first registered in 1994. To get through its MOT (annual Gov't safety check) will cost me approx. $3k, due to the oil leak, the ABS brakes being broken, the suspension needing replacing, and a few other things.
If I have all that work done, the car will be worth approx. $800.
Financially it just does not make sense to repair that car. I'm better off trading it in for $200 and buying another car - I can get an equivalent model that's 5-6 years old for not much more than $3k. And that'll last me for a few years more.
(I'm actually spending nearer $19k and buying a very very nice car that's 3 years old, but that was a matter of personal preference).
~Cederic
I don't drive the way you do. I get through brand new good quality tires in six months.
That may be because I accelerate/brake harder, because of road conditions here, because I don't keep them at the correct pressure, or because I have lots of fun going round the bends on the backroads where I live in four-wheel slides.
Something that gives me better lateral control with increased life is definitely of interest. If it avoids flat tires (one reason I need new tires so often) then so much the better!
~Cederic
They're already paid for.
(Sure the courts wont see it that way)
~cederic
Heh. On one mud, in Jan/Feb '92, the rules were, PvP only within a 5 level range, none under level 5, and level 5 and under were the only ones allowed in the newbie area.
So I create a character, get him to level five, give him very very good armour and weapon in the (my friends and I were amongst 3-4 of the top 10 players on the mud) and went killing.
Found a high level that was twinking his friend, and had actually given that friend the best armour/weapon in the game. Friend wimpies away from monster, I kill him, suddenly I have best weapon/armour going.
Another chap challenged me to a fight, and twinked his level 10 second-char with decent kit. Foolishly he didn't check my equipment first; one dead char happened.
There was a player guild with the ability to PvP outside the normal level range, but whenever they went for me I'd flee to the newbie area, or just move around the mud so fast they got left behind. So it became pointless for them to try. I'd tease them by running into their guild, patting them on the head and running out again.
Eventually the admin created a level five, boosted its stats, and came hunting me. They were healing it as they went along, when I ran off they'd teleport it in, and he still didn't kill me. But I did log off, as there wasn't really any chance of a fair fight.
I'm not sure to what extent you'd call it griefing. I didn't strictly break any game rules (except the one on 'second chars') and the couple of times that character did die I didn't abuse the people that got me (congratulated them generally). I just explored the limits of the game rules and made life much more interesting for everybody.
I don't think I'm remotely in the same league as Fansy though
~cederic
In theory, software patents are not permitted in Europe.
In practice, they are granted.
So yes, the EPO should check for obviousness, etc. But they don't. They're brain dead. It's incredibly difficult for a patent examiner to understand computer based concepts - what's blatantly obvious to me may seem an incredibly gifted piece of innovation to him.
And yes, software patents are granted on ideas.
> The same benefit that all other forms have technology have received. Increased incentives to improve, increased incentives to try other options that wouldn't be funded or tried if not for a blocking patent.
Sorry, the software industry needs additional incentives. Oh, of course - we've stopped innovating, there's no new software technology being devised, written, implemented. We don't need patents, we're doing extremely well without them and it would be stupid to grant them under such conditions.
~Cederic
ps: could you please preview next time? your comment was tricky to read.
> Now I write a new computer program to efficiently sort a database.
[...]
> Aren't I entitled to the same type of protection?
Except that software patents are given for the idea of sorting a database, not for the specific implementation. That's equivalent to patenting sorting apples, not patenting a given mechanical machine for doing so.
Further than that, proving non-obviousness is nigh on impossible. So the patent office doesn't try. Yet to any experienced software engineer, many database sorting mechanisms are obvious.
Add to that, if you hold a patent for an apple sorting machine, that gives you the ability to monopolise efficient apple sorting (until someone devises a competitive alternative).
If you hold a patent for database sorting, nobody else can sort databases. You've just crippled every industry in the country that uses databases; that's the IT industry, finance, telecomms, travel, manufacturing, oil, and pretty much everything else. And nobody will devise a competitive alternative because you've patented the idea, not the implementation. So nobody will extend the sorting to optimise it, simplify it, take it into new areas - in other words, innovation is being prevented.
So no, I don't agree that you are entitled to the same protection. It just isn't needed. Look how far the software industry has come in the last 50 years, without software patents, and look what it's provided, and please, tell me exactly what benefit there is to society from introducing them?
~Cederic
Thing is, if you leave aside the moral implications of their hack, it's still a very fine piece of hacking.
Add in that almost nobody will know the entry code for a free ride, that 9 out of 10 bikes are untouched, the main cost to the 'victim' is the cost of reflashing the hacked bikes. And that wont take too long.
I'm not saying I support this precise piece of hacking, but I do love that people are still getting up to this sort of thing. It's a healthy thing for society.
~Cederic
It's not a religious clash for most of us.
And stay the fuck out of the argument. It's American cunts like you that funded the bombs that forced me to spend too many years of my life checking under my car before I got into it.
~cederic
That's because they are. Especially when it comes to Football.
If you want to get people into adult board games who don't normally play them, Munchkin (or its variants) is a great way in.
It's incredibly simple to learn, very well balanced, actually requires you to screw people over (and so takes away the resentment that might otherwise cause) and is just darn good fun.
The other good game for drawing people in to intelligent board games is Settlers of Catan (mentioned elsewhere in this thread). This is great for getting girls interested - it's entirely non-combative, which for some reason appeals to them.
~Cederic
My archery club is building a new roof over our cooking area in the woods we use for archery.
More precisely, one club member and his son are building it. The rest of us stand around underneath talking about his great contribution and passing up cups of coffee to them.
This chap is a very gruff, down to earth, no nonsense sort of person. Soft skills are things he's never heard of, would scoff at.
When putting up the roof, he wanted to use Pythagoras theorem. Only, he asked us, "Is it 3-4-5? the triangle thing?"
We said yes, pulled out our PDAs and other portable calculation devices and chatted about trig at school. He got on with building a roof.
So yes, even "average" people need mathematics to some degree or other.
~Cederic
Thing is, if the spyware is installed because you're installing Kazaa, or advertisement support software, or because it promised funky functionality you wanted (the "ooh, pretty mouse pointers" approach) then you have given permission (implicit or explicit, intentional or otherwise) for it to be there.
I'd be interested to see the arguments in a legal case about the implied consent arising from visiting a web page too..
This doesn't excuse worms and email viruses, all of which I think you'll find do get prosecuted.
As for legislating against malware, I think such a law could be exceedingly difficult to word - trying to catch genuine malware as compared to "software with nasty bits included" (consider MMORPGs which monitor your PC for hacks and other cheats and reports back on them) or indeed genuine "legitimate" adware (such as 'free' Opera or Download Accelerator Plus.
I'm personally working to educate family and friends so they do think critically before installing random stuff, so they do check regularly with the usual tools, and so they do switch away from IE/Outlook for their web and mail needs.
~Cederic
And sit there for 40 minutes on red at rush hour as there's a constant large group of cars coming along the main road..
Oh man. You shoulda played EQ. It can take 8-10 hours to get back to your corpse, and by the time you get there, everything you'd originally killed to make it that far has respawned and after your now unarmoured and vulnerable self.
You really learn to not like dying so much you give up and find a game that actually rewards risk taking and exploration.
~Cederic
In 1999 a system went live at the BBC that allowed them to search metadata on all their video archives.
I mean, ALL. Even the old stuff - 1870s, IIRC.
They had a big (stonking) database which held the metadata (right down to the equivalent of "This image clip is of Princess Diana wearing a blue dress and kissing a baby"), which was extracted and put into a proper document search engine.
A web front-end was created that performed used the document search engine to get a list of results, then did a lookup to the original database to get the reference for the video clip in question.
Said reference telling you where on which shelf of which row of which large shed to go and look for the video tape/film reel/wax cylinder that contains the clip in question.
Darn good system, reasonably good performance, sucky technology (java applet using CORBA to connect to Java server, HTTP to connect to document search engine, JDBC to connect to original data source).
How do I know this? I wrote the darn thing..
Of course, it'll be obsolete and replaced by now.
I hope.
~cederic
I suspect it's due to UK labour laws - it's certainly not possible to make someone redundant if their role still exists; it could be argued that the role does still exist, and so they must be allowed to continue in it.
It just happens that the role is now in India not in the UK.
Since handover to the Indian company will occur prior to the role transferral there's no incentive for the Indian's to retain the current UK staff, so they'll probably make it very very attractive to take a redundancy package (based on the "Substantial change to role" caused by the change in location)
I'm happy to admit, I'm not fully au fait with the legalities, I'm just amused by the concept. Personally my role isn't one of those going (I'm merely at risk from our 25% headcount reduction which is also happening at the same time) so it's pretty academic for me.
~Cederic
The large corporation I work for is currently outsourcing all UK development to India.
One interesting facet is that people whose roles are being relocated to India have the option of joining the Indian company involved. Their role would still be in India, and so they would be based there, but they would keep their UK salary.
We're all currently discussing:
- how good your standard of living would be in India on a UK salary
- how long it would take for the Indian company to make you redundant (currently guess: 4 hours)
- what the Indian employment laws are like
All good fun,
~Cederic
The point of the original poster being that the optimisation/recompilation done with Java is done on-the-fly during execution, and thus matching the data being processed.
This is not something done in a statically compiled C/C++ program. Profile-guided optimisation in MSVC may help, but again, you don't necessarily have access to your full data set at compile-time and so you wont necessarily benefit from the full optimisation possible.
As for bounds checking, one reason I like Java is that it does it for me. If it didn't I'd have to do it myself - so it's going to happen anyway, so no speed differential there. Sure you can choose _when_ you bounds check in C/C++, but unfortunately some people optimise out the checking entirely, leading to those lovely buffer overflows that cause so many bugs..
I'm not trying to argue that Java is quicker than C/C++ - the cost of the hardware for either is considerably less than the development costs saved by going with a Java solution. Working in an Enterprise environment total cost matters, and hardware is just a small percentage of that cost.
To get back on topic, that makes LAMP laughable as an alternative to J2EE. Sure, you have a nice horizontally scalable architecture - but that's buying extra hardware to run quicker. And that's different to a clustered J2EE solution precisely how..? LAMP may well be a good solution, and make it LAOJ (Oracle and Java) and it's quite likely to be entering the Enterprise market pretty darn soon (as all four of those elements are already in common use; grid enabling them being the next logical step). But don't sell it to me as a J2EE killer - sell it to me on a total cost basis, and don't forget to include the cost of training, of maintenance, of licenses, of up-front development, of operational support, indeed, of hardware.
~Cederic
Unfortunately frames are also extremely useful.
I can do things with frames (and especially with iframes) that I can't do otherwise in HTML.
Admittedly this is because my personal HTML skills suck - I learned HTML in 1993 and haven't really caught up since..
However, the websites my company does its selling on are written by very proficient HTML developers and they still use iframes. They do so because it's the best tool for achieving their aims.
So feel free to stop using frames, even iframes, and block sites that require them. Just don't expect many sites to work afterwards.
Of course, that wont stop you getting hit by malicious banner ads. You'll need to block those or switch browser whether you accept frames or not..
~Cederic
At the company I work for:
- We have multiple websites selling direct to the customer
- The websites all connect to our back-end inventory system
- Some websites connect through to a bank to process credit cards
- Some websites connect through to a fulfilment system (others rely on the inventory system's connection to a different fulfillment system)
- The call centre apps connect to the same inventory and fulfillment systems
- A shop network connects through to the same inventory and fulfillment systems
- Various back-end systems connect to all these systems to provide MI and financial reports
- Those back-end systems connect to the accounting system to provide comparison info
- The accounting system is connected to the credit card payments systems via the bank
So either we don't provide websites, or we don't link those websites to our existing systems (which, given we're selling a limited resource, would prevent us accurately knowing our inventory available to sell), or we don't take payment online, or we end up with a navigable link from Internet to Accounting system.
Having said that, there are firewalls, switches, various independent networks (isolated by more firewalls and switches), etc.
It's a trade-off between risk and enabling the business. We have minimal risk from our current set-up, and it vastly improves our ability to generate turnover and earn income.
~Cederic