I was one of those who used to think that JavaScript was just no good, and needed a real programming language. Honestly, while I like my Java (C# too!), C++ or even Pascal, I found that JavaScript is very powerful, flexible, object oriented (using a prototypical method of creating classes of objects)... it is not better or even worse than Lua, Python, Ruby, or any other programming language (used for scripting or not). It's not the end-all-be-all, but at least it SEEMS it is more of a standard between modern browsers than the DOM is. JS frameworks (like jQuery, ext, prototype, moo tools or even YUI) evens the development field for cross-browser functionality even more.
The DOM is a piece of work, however... as you say, this is where the incompatibility nightmares begin. The JS frameworks I mentioned earlier HELP with that, but still cannot solve the issue without custom development for each browsing platform (even if minor) and testing across all major browsers. The varying levels of CSS support is the worst of the incompabilities, in my opinion - it's where most of my daily work resides is resolving the differences between IE 7, IE 8, FF 2.0+, Safari 3.0+ and Chrome 4.0+ are (thankful my org doesn't support IE 6 anymore).
After reading about this a bit more, I have to say that you are right. Why the change of usage and why the deprecation of the word "law"? I am certainly a layman in these respects (painfully obvious by now), using the word "theory" to the rest of the world seems to indicate something that isn't totally proven. I even think that the distinction is incorrectly taught to this day. I mean I was taught that in my junior-high school days in the mid 80s - and no indication was given, of course, that "law" is not used much anymore. Going into college my studies didn't really center around those distinctions either (ok, I am sure my Physics courses did, but I didn't care about them so much then - I was Computer "Science" - where not a lot of science is really taught in regards to software development).
when I'm wrong, I'm wrong... and usually, for all to see on/.
Being on topic and echoing in another post I made, I still think creationism and ID would make good philosophical studies (and maybe history, even thought for ID not sure of the significance except as the "counter" to evolution), not sure it would be appropriate for grade schools.
Well if it kept to history (even though it is pretty recent history and I am not so sure of the historical significance except as the most recent challenge to evolution - that is somewhat generally known) with an explanation that ID is NOT a scientific point of view or even a scientific study, then, yeah, teach the crap out of that crap. I think, that this stuff is more suited for college or high-school at least. Some of this is pretty heavy for younger kids. Even evolution is a pretty heavy subject - easier to grasp as science is more logical process that you can step anyone through, while philosophical thoughts are considerably more abstract and often requires just "belief" to have any "truth" in them.
I'll give you the ID argument, as, that is true, I know little about it. I understand scientific theory (the simplest way to explain a phenomenon based on observations from the past - generally the most plausible way to explain something - i am no expert, obviously). However, it is still theory and not law. Also, I do think these beliefs would be interesting to teach from a historical or philosophical standpoint, but the only one you could possible teach from a scientific standpoint would be evolution (at least right now)... even though, it still might (a minuscule chance) be wrong (still could be those fucking colossal space monkeys).
Also I did misspoke here: "Maybe teach creationism, ID AND evolution in school... teach them as the three most widely-accepted ideas on how the world started..." - using "on how the *world* started" was a very poor choice of words, in that instance I should have put "on how our species became what they are today" or something like that.
Yet, we still call it a "Theory" for some reason. And yes, I know about most of the evidence, and yes I buy that (more than anything else right now). I also understand that we might possibly be all wrong at any moment. As for the cosmology comment, I knew that was a veering off track a bit... but creationism and ID is a bit more broad reaching than evolution as they both tend to go over the concept on how "everything began" while evolution is more "the origin of species" - so I threw that in there.
As far as we all know, ALL of the beliefs on how our species came to be as they are today is simply theory or speculation. Evolution seems like a good logical choice for all of us. Some people really do think the universe was created just 6000 years ago (does that take into account time-dilation relative to God?) and some are trying out this theory of ID. Just because we don;t buy it doesn't mean it's wrong. Hell, we may be all wrong, it might be that the world was breathed into life by drunken colossal space monkeys (not related to humans) who had some sort of dare that one gave to another a hojillion years ago.
I think the evolution theory is the best we have right now, and the big band sounds plausible considering the expansion rate of the universe. Is that how it happened ultimately? No freaking clue and I think we fight and evangelize about it too much (myself included at times).
Maybe teach creationism, ID AND evolution in school... teach them as the three most widely-accepted ideas on how the world started and push them forward as all *theories* and there is no scientific proof (there is evidence for some, but that is not conclusive proof) for any of it yet?
Well, I guess the library could just use NAMES then and just see who check what out and never worry about math at all, that has to be a LOT better! The police won't find anyone that way... for example.
There's irony here?;) And yes, I am pretty selfish, this is true. Also, you are absolutely correct, technically speaking, I am NOT empathetic. In fact, i find it to be detrimental, but that is opinion, I am sure one who IS empathetic would look at my attitude, and think the same thing.
Of course, the image per scan would not be exact, so the resulting data that generates a hash is not exact, like above, but the end result is the same, a hash.... forgot about the scanning bit not producing an exact image replica of the fingerprint each time
I bet these "Mathematical Templates" end up being a hash. If so, then it is a one way thing, if you have a the hash, you can't get the fingerprint. Hell, breaking down the fingerprint into a a series of bytes (like, an image file perhaps) and doing some sort of SHA256 (or and hash-algorithm with a lot of bits for the output) would probably do the trick - mathematically speaking, no one person would get the same hash (as a 256 bit number is pretty damn big - in the case of a 256 bit hash) and no one could extract fingerprints from the hash.
I come off as not empathetic... however, I try very hard to see everything from everyone's point of view, I try to see all sides and be in someone else shoes before making any judgement. However, people do a lot of stupid stuff and I believe that they deserve the consequences for doing said stupid things. I may see *why* they did that stupid thing and try understand their motivation, but not sorry for them when they face the consequences. I expect people to view me the same way when I do stupid things. Life also is not fair, people bitching that things go wrong all the time for them (even if it clearly not their fault or when things aren't really that bad) are speaking to the choir... we all go thru that shit, suck it up and try to see the good days (or at least the "not bad" days). The bad days are frustrating, we get it... we don't want to hear it all the time:)
Personally VS2005 and 2008 are my favorite dev environments (can't speak for 2010, haven't used it much), I can get a lot done very quickly with those tools. In fact, I know a lot of devs (.NET fans or not, MS fans or not) that particularly think VS is one of MS's best software offerings they have ever made. I also know people who like BOTH XCode and VS. Of course, these days I have to work with RAD (yes, I just threw up in my mouth a little bit).
Modded funny? This person is damn near absolutely correct. The only problem is that having 13 keys is too much. More than five and I am wondering if I need any of the stuff the keys go to anymore.
Isn't Opera Mini for resource starved mobile devices that have a hard time rendering and dealing with semi-complex web pages on the device directly? The iPhone has a very capable, full-featured mobile browser already - you know, Mobile Safari? I know the iPhone (as well as the iPod Touch and iPad) can be a bit resource-light for applications, but it is more than enough to handle most of the intarwebs quite well and fairly smoothly.
so a black box that I cannot interact with - great. That being said, with the KVM, the system is useless... but you can provide all three and still have a system in the $350 range. After that, however, just get a netbook.... geez
Slashdot Mirror
Also, the DOM should be replaced with creamy peanut butter ... mmmmmmmm
I was one of those who used to think that JavaScript was just no good, and needed a real programming language. Honestly, while I like my Java (C# too!), C++ or even Pascal, I found that JavaScript is very powerful, flexible, object oriented (using a prototypical method of creating classes of objects)... it is not better or even worse than Lua, Python, Ruby, or any other programming language (used for scripting or not). It's not the end-all-be-all, but at least it SEEMS it is more of a standard between modern browsers than the DOM is. JS frameworks (like jQuery, ext, prototype, moo tools or even YUI) evens the development field for cross-browser functionality even more.
The DOM is a piece of work, however... as you say, this is where the incompatibility nightmares begin. The JS frameworks I mentioned earlier HELP with that, but still cannot solve the issue without custom development for each browsing platform (even if minor) and testing across all major browsers. The varying levels of CSS support is the worst of the incompabilities, in my opinion - it's where most of my daily work resides is resolving the differences between IE 7, IE 8, FF 2.0+, Safari 3.0+ and Chrome 4.0+ are (thankful my org doesn't support IE 6 anymore).
After reading about this a bit more, I have to say that you are right. Why the change of usage and why the deprecation of the word "law"? I am certainly a layman in these respects (painfully obvious by now), using the word "theory" to the rest of the world seems to indicate something that isn't totally proven. I even think that the distinction is incorrectly taught to this day. I mean I was taught that in my junior-high school days in the mid 80s - and no indication was given, of course, that "law" is not used much anymore. Going into college my studies didn't really center around those distinctions either (ok, I am sure my Physics courses did, but I didn't care about them so much then - I was Computer "Science" - where not a lot of science is really taught in regards to software development).
/.
when I'm wrong, I'm wrong... and usually, for all to see on
Being on topic and echoing in another post I made, I still think creationism and ID would make good philosophical studies (and maybe history, even thought for ID not sure of the significance except as the "counter" to evolution), not sure it would be appropriate for grade schools.
Well if it kept to history (even though it is pretty recent history and I am not so sure of the historical significance except as the most recent challenge to evolution - that is somewhat generally known) with an explanation that ID is NOT a scientific point of view or even a scientific study, then, yeah, teach the crap out of that crap. I think, that this stuff is more suited for college or high-school at least. Some of this is pretty heavy for younger kids. Even evolution is a pretty heavy subject - easier to grasp as science is more logical process that you can step anyone through, while philosophical thoughts are considerably more abstract and often requires just "belief" to have any "truth" in them.
I'll give you the ID argument, as, that is true, I know little about it. I understand scientific theory (the simplest way to explain a phenomenon based on observations from the past - generally the most plausible way to explain something - i am no expert, obviously). However, it is still theory and not law. Also, I do think these beliefs would be interesting to teach from a historical or philosophical standpoint, but the only one you could possible teach from a scientific standpoint would be evolution (at least right now)... even though, it still might (a minuscule chance) be wrong (still could be those fucking colossal space monkeys).
Also I did misspoke here: "Maybe teach creationism, ID AND evolution in school... teach them as the three most widely-accepted ideas on how the world started..." - using "on how the *world* started" was a very poor choice of words, in that instance I should have put "on how our species became what they are today" or something like that.
Yet, we still call it a "Theory" for some reason. And yes, I know about most of the evidence, and yes I buy that (more than anything else right now). I also understand that we might possibly be all wrong at any moment. As for the cosmology comment, I knew that was a veering off track a bit... but creationism and ID is a bit more broad reaching than evolution as they both tend to go over the concept on how "everything began" while evolution is more "the origin of species" - so I threw that in there.
As far as we all know, ALL of the beliefs on how our species came to be as they are today is simply theory or speculation. Evolution seems like a good logical choice for all of us. Some people really do think the universe was created just 6000 years ago (does that take into account time-dilation relative to God?) and some are trying out this theory of ID. Just because we don;t buy it doesn't mean it's wrong. Hell, we may be all wrong, it might be that the world was breathed into life by drunken colossal space monkeys (not related to humans) who had some sort of dare that one gave to another a hojillion years ago.
I think the evolution theory is the best we have right now, and the big band sounds plausible considering the expansion rate of the universe. Is that how it happened ultimately? No freaking clue and I think we fight and evangelize about it too much (myself included at times).
Maybe teach creationism, ID AND evolution in school... teach them as the three most widely-accepted ideas on how the world started and push them forward as all *theories* and there is no scientific proof (there is evidence for some, but that is not conclusive proof) for any of it yet?
nice... I wouldn't have thought of that. Hence why I don't work with image scanning and/or manipulation field of software development.
Well, I guess the library could just use NAMES then and just see who check what out and never worry about math at all, that has to be a LOT better! The police won't find anyone that way... for example.
I subscribe to that train of thought :)
After reading the replies and reading more about empathy, you're right - I am not empathetic.
There's irony here? ;) And yes, I am pretty selfish, this is true. Also, you are absolutely correct, technically speaking, I am NOT empathetic. In fact, i find it to be detrimental, but that is opinion, I am sure one who IS empathetic would look at my attitude, and think the same thing.
Of course, the image per scan would not be exact, so the resulting data that generates a hash is not exact, like above, but the end result is the same, a hash.... forgot about the scanning bit not producing an exact image replica of the fingerprint each time
I bet these "Mathematical Templates" end up being a hash. If so, then it is a one way thing, if you have a the hash, you can't get the fingerprint. Hell, breaking down the fingerprint into a a series of bytes (like, an image file perhaps) and doing some sort of SHA256 (or and hash-algorithm with a lot of bits for the output) would probably do the trick - mathematically speaking, no one person would get the same hash (as a 256 bit number is pretty damn big - in the case of a 256 bit hash) and no one could extract fingerprints from the hash.
I come off as not empathetic... however, I try very hard to see everything from everyone's point of view, I try to see all sides and be in someone else shoes before making any judgement. However, people do a lot of stupid stuff and I believe that they deserve the consequences for doing said stupid things. I may see *why* they did that stupid thing and try understand their motivation, but not sorry for them when they face the consequences. I expect people to view me the same way when I do stupid things. Life also is not fair, people bitching that things go wrong all the time for them (even if it clearly not their fault or when things aren't really that bad) are speaking to the choir... we all go thru that shit, suck it up and try to see the good days (or at least the "not bad" days). The bad days are frustrating, we get it... we don't want to hear it all the time :)
Personally VS2005 and 2008 are my favorite dev environments (can't speak for 2010, haven't used it much), I can get a lot done very quickly with those tools. In fact, I know a lot of devs (.NET fans or not, MS fans or not) that particularly think VS is one of MS's best software offerings they have ever made. I also know people who like BOTH XCode and VS. Of course, these days I have to work with RAD (yes, I just threw up in my mouth a little bit).
Big deal... they already probably made a hojillion in profit. Consumers already paid the price, now the govt gets it
Consumer: 0 - Big Business: 1987328783
...that wealthy shoppers like? BFD (yes... yes... you can say the Apple crowd may dig some of these brands, again, BFD)
Modded funny? This person is damn near absolutely correct. The only problem is that having 13 keys is too much. More than five and I am wondering if I need any of the stuff the keys go to anymore.
Car key, wife's van key, home key
;)
the end... fits in my pocket well. The rest of you need less crap to be responsible for
We know a turd can be polished... it's just that... well, it's still a turd.
I hope this was some "over my head" joke - i'm not seeing the serious health problems here, and not sure how this would cause "cognitive deficiencies"
Isn't Opera Mini for resource starved mobile devices that have a hard time rendering and dealing with semi-complex web pages on the device directly? The iPhone has a very capable, full-featured mobile browser already - you know, Mobile Safari? I know the iPhone (as well as the iPod Touch and iPad) can be a bit resource-light for applications, but it is more than enough to handle most of the intarwebs quite well and fairly smoothly.
so a black box that I cannot interact with - great. That being said, with the KVM, the system is useless... but you can provide all three and still have a system in the $350 range. After that, however, just get a netbook.... geez