I usually write a code comment and then discover that I should move the code under the comment into a separate function anyway, either for readability (e.g. of page-long loop) or re-use, so then I can shorten the comment to a function name and live without the comment.
Long or copy-and-paste generated comments often suck, because like code, they tend to rot when not maintained properly.
Comments describing method "contracts" are usually the most useful, while comments of the kind "parameter: Integer result - the result" are not very helpful, even when they cover every method.
Technically the diff you make between your cover song (which you legally produced by paying a little money) could be considered a derivative works of your song and the original song, which would mean you need to acquire licenses to both songs.
The same might apply to the 'hash', as you call it, but what you really want is an XOR or similar operation applied to your song and the original song. XOR basically mixes your song and the original song such that applying XOR again unmixes the song.
Your idea won't work if the falsified section of the work always are falsified with 50:50 chance. On the other, you would be able to put together fake marks easily. However, a countermeasure to fake marks is to only use a subset of the marks, for example those that match a number produced by an algorithm or have a certain checksum or hash with certain properties. (I hereby dyspatent that idea by publishing it;-)
The patent by Amazon at the core is not a new idea, it is just mixing A and B and patenting that feels somewhat silly. There's a guy a round somewhere who works with a matrix method to find such new inventions. I would love to see his website, but I forgot his name..
That in interesting question. With the right tweaks, optimistically thinking, you might get optical communication between far away neurons to work. Wonder if it would be faster than the chemoelectronic one? Anyway, the first thing I'd try to do with such a brain-computer uplink would be to try and connect google to it.
Well if you know that Mr. Wang has not only been hacking your website but has also used a previously hacked site in his own country as a staging area for these attempts, then I imagine there would be some way to get local law enforcement interested. Not that I'm sure doing that would make the world a better place, but the threat of it might keep people from just defacing websites or fun.
I don't exactly agree, but I know where he is coming from..
Ever found out your favorite website was hacked, you looked at the logs and find out that the attackers cannot be tracked down becaused they used tor or anonymizing proxies?
That is when a network where people are resonsible for their actions would be useful. I wouldn't even mind if the culprits stayed anonymous, as long as I would know the proxy would not accept any more traffic from them.
On the other hand, I suggest we put all who suggest the speed of light is so easy vanquished into a superspace bubble, where light moves 1000x slower - then the guys in the bubble will think that the computer outside of the bubble runs 1000x faster. And as a bonus, my idea is admissible by known laws of physics.
I think games should come with an upgrade after 4 years to work without CD, and should simply use the registration number for online play identification to weed out keys being shared.
I understand the shops fear piracy, but I'm kind of tired of playing discjockey when I switch games, and tired to fear scratching my cds or buying a drive that is incompatible with copy protection. I think Stardock does that one right.
Well, an in-game ad is also kind of an insane way to deal with people who play your game.
Instead of saying "This game is great", an in-game ad says "Go do something else that is more fun". It is similar to a porn site that tries to make money off links to competing porn sites.
I can see that ads have their place in free games which would otherwise not be possible, and that it could make sense if your game melds in with real life non-gaming ads.
The problem with the inline expires header is that it only applies to elements loaded in the past. So if something is already in the cache with a wrong expires header, there is no way to get it out of there except by clearing cache or maybe sending a new expires header when a HEAD command is being received.
Like a trademark, a soundmark is there to identify a service or brand.
When the sound isn't used to identify a service or brand, then it is still ok to use the sound.
So you can still say "You're fired" even when Trump holds a trademark on the phrase and the same holds for duck-quacking devices which by the way have been around much longer.
What if the editor who decides which stories get published also could set how many max positive points a post could have?
Then instead of 50 posts in this topic with 5 points we'd get 10 posts with 50 points, and these could be considered the best questions to ask blizzard, duplicates excluded.
I think the grandparent post was thinking of dyson spheres and computational shells around a sun.
Basically a civilization so advanced that it uses all the power generated by its sun by placing a shell absorbing all light around the sun and absorbing all energy, making the sun appear dark.
There would be more than one shell, as the next shell will be there a bit far outer to absorb the Schwarzschild radiation and other waste energy from the inner shell, maybe using it to do computations.
So instead of dark matter there would be dark stars surrounded by dyson spheres.
This IMHO doesn't work well because the next thing the phone does when it finds it impossible to transmit is to ramp up its transmission power to the set maximum => hot pockets
Turing machines may be equivalent, but their efficiency at various tasks isn't.
I think it would be a very interesting task that would increase the understanding of NP-complex problems (including simulations of turing machines on other turing machines) to see the efficiency cost graph.
I would suggest you take a working game and add background information. If you proceed a different way, for example designing the teaching goals first, you put your own creativity to a very hard test.
For example I was recently asked what I would like to see in the "Modern Combat" Add-On to Battle for Wesnoth as unit descriptions. I answered: I want to see the history of these units. But providing history demands quite an effort in research.
MS Word and Oo should die because both encourage you not to use styles for formatting your document.
A Word document prepared by an average person is usually impossible to reformat as quickly as it would be possible if people had used global styles instead of highlighting everything with its own custom formatting.
I noticed one of the posters said how well Word worked for him when he was using styles consistently. That poster is an exceptional Word user, not a normal one.
..longer key make the attack more difficult..
on
Another New AES Attack
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Well, if you had asked whether more rounds make the attack more difficult, then I would have an answer: more rounds don't necessarily make the attack more difficult.
To verify this take a rubiks cube in its solved state. Hold it such that your fingers touch the top middle and bottom middle square. Now begin to rotate the right side of the cube by one turn, then turn the entire cube by 90 degrees. Repeat this. After some time you will notice that the cube begins to return to the starting position, although it looked quite mixed in between.
Mixed= Good hashing function Solved= Very bad hashing function
It appears to me as well that Linus Torvalds makes sense.
But perhaps Alan Cox makes sense too - he knew the code well, and maybe there are opposite objectives(keeping userland working and keeping the tty subsystem bug-free) which cannot be reconciled.
When Alan Cox had realized that, he probably should have been hanging a red flag out and not commit the code to his published branches.
This is assuming/predicting that the other "nicer" patch Linus Torvalds talks about will have drawbacks, like interfering with other fixes. (I'm pulling this out of my magicians hat, to really be able understand the problem you need to be like three persons.)
Slashdot Mirror
I usually write a code comment and then discover that I should move the code under the comment into a separate function anyway, either for readability (e.g. of page-long loop) or re-use, so then I can shorten the comment to a function name and live without the comment.
Long or copy-and-paste generated comments often suck, because like code, they tend to rot when not maintained properly.
Comments describing method "contracts" are usually the most useful, while comments of the kind "parameter: Integer result - the result" are not very helpful, even when they cover every method.
So you are a good coder if you write short comments, like (?): //HACK !RG: code must work with decimals although it was never planned to.
hack();
Technically the diff you make between your cover song (which you legally produced by paying a little money) could be considered a derivative works of your song and the original song, which would mean you need to acquire licenses to both songs.
The same might apply to the 'hash', as you call it, but what you really want is an XOR or similar operation applied to your song and the original song. XOR basically mixes your song and the original song such that applying XOR again unmixes the song.
Your idea won't work if the falsified section of the work always are falsified with 50:50 chance. ;-)
On the other, you would be able to put together fake marks easily.
However, a countermeasure to fake marks is to only use a subset of the marks, for example those that match a number produced by an algorithm or have a certain checksum or hash with certain properties.
(I hereby dyspatent that idea by publishing it
The patent by Amazon at the core is not a new idea, it is just mixing A and B and patenting that feels somewhat silly. There's a guy a round somewhere who works with a matrix method to find such new inventions. I would love to see his website, but I forgot his name ..
That in interesting question. With the right tweaks, optimistically thinking, you might get optical communication between far away neurons to work. Wonder if it would be faster than the chemoelectronic one? Anyway, the first thing I'd try to do with such a brain-computer uplink would be to try and connect google to it.
Well if you know that Mr. Wang has not only been hacking your website but has also used a previously hacked site in his own country as a staging area for these attempts, then I imagine there would be some way to get local law enforcement interested. Not that I'm sure doing that would make the world a better place, but the threat of it might keep people from just defacing websites or fun.
I don't exactly agree, but I know where he is coming from ..
Ever found out your favorite website was hacked, you looked at the logs and find out that the attackers cannot be tracked down becaused they used tor or anonymizing proxies?
That is when a network where people are resonsible for their actions would be useful. I wouldn't even mind if the culprits stayed anonymous, as long as I would know the proxy would not accept any more traffic from them.
On the other hand, I suggest we put all who suggest the speed of light is so easy vanquished into a superspace bubble, where light moves 1000x slower - then the guys in the bubble will think that the computer outside of the bubble runs 1000x faster. And as a bonus, my idea is admissible by known laws of physics.
This older writeup describes a similar idea:
http://www.everything2.com/title/CERN+and+the+Anthropic+Principle
I think games should come with an upgrade after 4 years to work without CD, and should simply use the registration number for online play identification to weed out keys being shared.
I understand the shops fear piracy, but I'm kind of tired of playing discjockey when I switch games, and tired to fear scratching my cds or buying a drive that is incompatible with copy protection. I think Stardock does that one right.
Well, an in-game ad is also kind of an insane way to deal with people who play your game.
Instead of saying "This game is great", an in-game ad says "Go do something else that is more fun".
It is similar to a porn site that tries to make money off links to competing porn sites.
I can see that ads have their place in free games which would otherwise not be possible, and that it could make sense if your game melds in with real life non-gaming ads.
Maybe file a DMCA takedown request against yourself, then file a counternotice :-P
This doesn't sound like "Sins Of A Solar Empire", but like "Savage", just like the other AC said.
Problem with Savage is that there need to be like 4-8 players per commander, so not everyone can play RTS.
This isn't why I stopped playing Savage though, I stopped because I don't manage to kill the enemy in close combat.
The problem with the inline expires header is that it only applies to elements loaded in the past.
So if something is already in the cache with a wrong expires header, there is no way to get it out of there except by clearing cache or maybe sending a new expires header when a HEAD command is being received.
Like a trademark, a soundmark is there to identify a service or brand.
When the sound isn't used to identify a service or brand, then it is still ok to use the sound.
So you can still say "You're fired" even when Trump holds a trademark on the phrase and the same holds for duck-quacking devices which by the way have been around much longer.
What if the editor who decides which stories get published also could set how many max positive points a post could have?
Then instead of 50 posts in this topic with 5 points we'd get 10 posts with 50 points, and these could be considered the best questions to ask blizzard, duplicates excluded.
I think the grandparent post was thinking of dyson spheres and computational shells around a sun.
Basically a civilization so advanced that it uses all the power generated by its sun by placing a shell absorbing all light around the sun and absorbing all energy, making the sun appear dark.
There would be more than one shell, as the next shell will be there a bit far outer to absorb the Schwarzschild radiation and other waste energy from the inner shell, maybe using it to do computations.
So instead of dark matter there would be dark stars surrounded by dyson spheres.
This IMHO doesn't work well because the next thing the phone does when it finds it impossible to transmit is to ramp up its transmission power to the set maximum => hot pockets
http://www.google.com/search?q=58.44+chemistry returns the result as hit 3 and hits before that are related too.
PETA is against your right to arm bears, and I side with them.
Turing machines may be equivalent, but their efficiency at various tasks isn't.
I think it would be a very interesting task that would increase the understanding of NP-complex problems (including simulations of turing machines on other turing machines) to see the efficiency cost graph.
I would suggest you take a working game and add background information. If you proceed a different way, for example designing the teaching goals first, you put your own creativity to a very hard test.
For example I was recently asked what I would like to see in the "Modern Combat" Add-On to Battle for Wesnoth as unit descriptions. I answered: I want to see the history of these units. But providing history demands quite an effort in research.
MS Word and Oo should die because both encourage you not to use styles for formatting your document.
A Word document prepared by an average person is usually impossible to reformat as quickly as it would be possible if people had used global styles instead of highlighting everything with its own custom formatting.
I noticed one of the posters said how well Word worked for him when he was using styles consistently.
That poster is an exceptional Word user, not a normal one.
Well, if you had asked whether more rounds make the attack more difficult, then I would have an answer: more rounds don't necessarily make the attack more difficult.
To verify this take a rubiks cube in its solved state. Hold it such that your fingers touch the top middle and bottom middle square. Now begin to rotate the right side of the cube by one turn, then turn the entire cube by 90 degrees. Repeat this. After some time you will notice that the cube begins to return to the starting position, although it looked quite mixed in between.
Mixed= Good hashing function
Solved= Very bad hashing function
It appears to me as well that Linus Torvalds makes sense.
But perhaps Alan Cox makes sense too - he knew the code well, and maybe there are opposite objectives(keeping userland working and keeping the tty subsystem bug-free) which cannot be reconciled.
When Alan Cox had realized that, he probably should have been hanging a red flag out and not commit the code to his published branches.
This is assuming/predicting that the other "nicer" patch Linus Torvalds talks about will have drawbacks, like interfering with other fixes. (I'm pulling this out of my magicians hat, to really be able understand the problem you need to be like three persons.)