And the way I see it. Using is also contributing. If you use open source, you don't pay money to the competitors. Money which they would use to market their product.
Also if you ever tell, mention or if someone can see you using an open source application, you have marketed it. Google has done this also as we know that they are using open source software.
So while Google is doing a lot more than just using. Don't underestimate the power of "just using".
> charging them head on while screaming is not going to work very well
I think we are doing just fine. It is the Microsoft who is losing here. Why do you think they first ignored us, then tried their FUD campaign and now they want to be our friends? To me it seems that we are doing better and better.
It is not just them. I just run a gallup on a forum where "normal" people in my country like to hang out (mostly female parents). 7/8 of them think that collecting fingerprints from everyone is not just acceptable, but actually a good idea (to catch criminals).
They also fail to believe how things could get worse if we accept that.
I'm fairly certain that we are doomed.
So if you get a receipt from the fuel you used in the winning flight, it doesn't matter if the price goes up. If however you fail and you need to buy more fuel to try again, then the increase in price would be a problem to you.
I know a woman who was forbidden to use the family computer by her father (probably because the father feared that the computer could break (at that time, the computers were quite expensive and he is not that good with computers).
After I met her, allowed her to use my computer and started teaching her, she has become something above average with computers (yes, she is using Linux), even she is still not interested with programming.
"It's too risky for anybody to translate that [The Bible] into other languages. Mistakes can creep in... and that can lead to heresy. True Christians should only read English."
"If your original Hebrew disagrees with my original King James --- your original Hebrew is wrong. If your original Hebrew agrees with my original King James, your original Hebrew is right."
IMHO, if he has already started teaching C, then that is what he should use. Not because C is superior language, but because teaching multiple languages will certainly confuse the student.
I think that C might actually be pretty good language to start with. You have to do a little more work to write something you might be able to write less lines in e.g. Java, but then again it is pretty logical how things work. E.g. first you initialize SDL, then you get the surface where to draw. Then you draw into it, then you display it.
In Java, you initialize by creating certain classes inherited from certain classes, get the drawing surface as a method parameter for a method, which name must be something special then you draw to it and then it is automatically displayed. Then you have to study API to find out how is it updated.
I'm not saying that Java is hard to use for experienced programmer, I think it is very easy. A lot easier than C. But IMHO it is harder to understand for someone new to programming. Or even someone new to Java programming.
I got one LED bulb currently on providing me the light for computer usage. It is a spot light and consumes only 2,5W of energy, compared to 12W which my previous energy-saver bulb consumed and 60W which the first "normal" bulb consumed.
It provides enough light for me and saves a lot of electricity compared to the alternatives. It also looks very cool, because of its small size. But the long life (which I assume they have) is the real reason why I prefer them.)
I think that code should be reused at the point when someone is writing something that has been written before. At that point it is IMHO better to rewrite the old code into a shape that both programs can use it, so that they both can share that code.
Simple reasons: - Now you KNOW that this code can be shared aka reused. So it won't be used by just one application. - If you needed that code in 2 applications, there is a high chance that you need it in others also.
But this is often not done, because short term thinking and deadlines beat long term thinking. And stable applications are something one does not want to touch.
Go with PHP. It is easy to setup, very easy to learn (especially if you have a background in C, C++ or Java) and quite easy to find developers familiar with it.
If you are building something very big, you might want to use Java and take advantage of its huge library of classes. But for small projects I think it is too heavy.
> I wonder how many voters would even read the bills before voting on them.
What about politicians? They (should) read the bills and their whole job is to make the best choices. Yet, how many times have you seen that politicians would have agreed on anything? They don't vote for what is smart. They vote for what they believe is smart. Their vote is based on feelings.
Aging does have one important purpose. Its purpose is to stop cancer by killing the cells after they have duplicated themselves enough many times, before the duplicating starts producing bad copies.
If you could find a way to identify bad copies and destroy them. You could perhaps disable the aging-counter without side effects.
The goal is to stop and even reverse the aging. That means that you could live 5000 years in a body of a 20-30 year old. Notice that there is no upper limit for the age you could live (the 5000 years is from their website), but you would probably die in an accident at some point.
No, it means that retirement would no longer be required. You would need to work only long enough to gain enough money to support your living for as long as you want, before going back to work. E.g. work for 40 years, rest 40 years. Work 40 years again, rest 40 years etc.
Then again one should remember that science is working with AI and robotics also. It is very much possible that 50 years from now, majority of the human kind does not need to work at all. Robots will do the work.
Natural average age for dying for humans would be something like 30 years. If you think there is something after death, why extend your life with medicine and stuff like that?
C# is not good for cross platform development. And Java can't be used to make small quick scripts (because startup time is so slow). None of those can be used for making low level drivers or embedded software with strict requirements.
I think C is the best option, but in general the whole idea of using just one language is stupid, because making e.g. a small dynamic website with C requires a lot more work than it would require with e.g. PHP. Even it is possible.
Unless they are focusing on very small area in software development, they will only lose money if they use only one language.
> how does the money get to the poor, and from whom
Consider governments. They buy Microsoft products and the money comes from the national budgets. If they wouldn't buy the products, they could spend the money e.g. to health care (usually direct benefit for the poor) or they could even donate some of it to the countries that are more need of money.
The point is that the money could be spend on something more important. And usually at least some of it helps the poor also.
Actually you really need just one person in the company with "haxor" skills to test the security of the products that others make. A single person can very quickly find a lot of common holes. That person doesn't need to a developer. He/She can be there just for testing or even just for supervising others that make the testing, to make sure that they test for security vulnerabilities also.
Slashdot Mirror
And the way I see it. Using is also contributing. If you use open source, you don't pay money to the competitors. Money which they would use to market their product.
Also if you ever tell, mention or if someone can see you using an open source application, you have marketed it. Google has done this also as we know that they are using open source software.
So while Google is doing a lot more than just using. Don't underestimate the power of "just using".
> They still own 90% of the desktop
They also owned over 90% of the web browsers in 2003. Now it is less than 80%. http://www.thecounter.com/stats/2008/August/browser.php
> their server market share is growing
By what study?
> charging them head on while screaming is not going to work very well
I think we are doing just fine. It is the Microsoft who is losing here. Why do you think they first ignored us, then tried their FUD campaign and now they want to be our friends? To me it seems that we are doing better and better.
"de Icaza: I hope so. It might end up that at some point Microsoft just open ups .net"
LOL
It is not just them. I just run a gallup on a forum where "normal" people in my country like to hang out (mostly female parents). 7/8 of them think that collecting fingerprints from everyone is not just acceptable, but actually a good idea (to catch criminals). They also fail to believe how things could get worse if we accept that. I'm fairly certain that we are doomed.
"Receipts must be produced, if requested, for all items or services purchased which fall within the ã999.99 budget"
http://www.n-prize.com/rules_in_full.html
So if you get a receipt from the fuel you used in the winning flight, it doesn't matter if the price goes up. If however you fail and you need to buy more fuel to try again, then the increase in price would be a problem to you.
I know a woman who was forbidden to use the family computer by her father (probably because the father feared that the computer could break (at that time, the computers were quite expensive and he is not that good with computers).
After I met her, allowed her to use my computer and started teaching her, she has become something above average with computers (yes, she is using Linux), even she is still not interested with programming.
"It's too risky for anybody to translate that [The Bible] into other languages. Mistakes can creep in... and that can lead to heresy. True Christians should only read English."
"If your original Hebrew disagrees with my original King James --- your original Hebrew is wrong. If your original Hebrew agrees with my original King James, your original Hebrew is right."
http://wanusmaximus.livejournal.com/1131751.html
IMHO, if he has already started teaching C, then that is what he should use. Not because C is superior language, but because teaching multiple languages will certainly confuse the student.
I think that C might actually be pretty good language to start with. You have to do a little more work to write something you might be able to write less lines in e.g. Java, but then again it is pretty logical how things work. E.g. first you initialize SDL, then you get the surface where to draw. Then you draw into it, then you display it.
In Java, you initialize by creating certain classes inherited from certain classes, get the drawing surface as a method parameter for a method, which name must be something special then you draw to it and then it is automatically displayed. Then you have to study API to find out how is it updated.
I'm not saying that Java is hard to use for experienced programmer, I think it is very easy. A lot easier than C. But IMHO it is harder to understand for someone new to programming. Or even someone new to Java programming.
Teach about game programming. E.g. show how to draw simple graphics using libSDL and then perhaps give hints how the graphics could be moved etc.
I started programming myself, because I wanted to write games. I've been programming for 10 years and I still write games on my free time.
I got one LED bulb currently on providing me the light for computer usage. It is a spot light and consumes only 2,5W of energy, compared to 12W which my previous energy-saver bulb consumed and 60W which the first "normal" bulb consumed.
It provides enough light for me and saves a lot of electricity compared to the alternatives. It also looks very cool, because of its small size. But the long life (which I assume they have) is the real reason why I prefer them.)
I think that code should be reused at the point when someone is writing something that has been written before. At that point it is IMHO better to rewrite the old code into a shape that both programs can use it, so that they both can share that code.
Simple reasons:
- Now you KNOW that this code can be shared aka reused. So it won't be used by just one application.
- If you needed that code in 2 applications, there is a high chance that you need it in others also.
But this is often not done, because short term thinking and deadlines beat long term thinking. And stable applications are something one does not want to touch.
They could crash themselves or any application (e.g. game) using them.
Go with PHP. It is easy to setup, very easy to learn (especially if you have a background in C, C++ or Java) and quite easy to find developers familiar with it.
If you are building something very big, you might want to use Java and take advantage of its huge library of classes. But for small projects I think it is too heavy.
> I wonder how many voters would even read the bills before voting on them.
What about politicians? They (should) read the bills and their whole job is to make the best choices. Yet, how many times have you seen that politicians would have agreed on anything? They don't vote for what is smart. They vote for what they believe is smart. Their vote is based on feelings.
Aging does have one important purpose. Its purpose is to stop cancer by killing the cells after they have duplicated themselves enough many times, before the duplicating starts producing bad copies.
If you could find a way to identify bad copies and destroy them. You could perhaps disable the aging-counter without side effects.
The goal is to stop and even reverse the aging. That means that you could live 5000 years in a body of a 20-30 year old. Notice that there is no upper limit for the age you could live (the 5000 years is from their website), but you would probably die in an accident at some point.
Answer to that is found from the website:
"I've said in the past that the first person to live to 1000 was probably born by 1945"
http://www.mfoundation.org/index.php?pagename=timeframe
No, it means that retirement would no longer be required. You would need to work only long enough to gain enough money to support your living for as long as you want, before going back to work. E.g. work for 40 years, rest 40 years. Work 40 years again, rest 40 years etc.
Then again one should remember that science is working with AI and robotics also. It is very much possible that 50 years from now, majority of the human kind does not need to work at all. Robots will do the work.
Natural average age for dying for humans would be something like 30 years. If you think there is something after death, why extend your life with medicine and stuff like that?
Answer to that is found from the website:
"I've said in the past that the first person to live to 1000 was probably born by 1945"
http://www.mfoundation.org/index.php?pagename=timeframe
> Microsoft's own DNS implementation is also affected
Did anyone else notice that today is Tuesday?
C# is not good for cross platform development. And Java can't be used to make small quick scripts (because startup time is so slow). None of those can be used for making low level drivers or embedded software with strict requirements.
I think C is the best option, but in general the whole idea of using just one language is stupid, because making e.g. a small dynamic website with C requires a lot more work than it would require with e.g. PHP. Even it is possible.
Unless they are focusing on very small area in software development, they will only lose money if they use only one language.
> how does the money get to the poor, and from whom
Consider governments. They buy Microsoft products and the money comes from the national budgets. If they wouldn't buy the products, they could spend the money e.g. to health care (usually direct benefit for the poor) or they could even donate some of it to the countries that are more need of money.
The point is that the money could be spend on something more important. And usually at least some of it helps the poor also.
Move to another location where you have better options.
Actually you really need just one person in the company with "haxor" skills to test the security of the products that others make. A single person can very quickly find a lot of common holes. That person doesn't need to a developer. He/She can be there just for testing or even just for supervising others that make the testing, to make sure that they test for security vulnerabilities also.