Bring from the old school of programing, I am quite literally programmed to never, ever, allocate without making damn sure I de-allocate.
The same thing goes for stuffing anything into arrays, doubly so for arrays of string, or any kind of buffer. Always check to see that you are not overflowing, the time penalty is not that critical, but failing to check and overflowing will be the thing that brings your code to a screaming halt, if not the entire box, depending on how low level the code is you are writing.
An argument can be made such as, "Its Java and I don't allocate memory directly but on the other hand you do allocate entire new objects and all of those have impact on memory. We rely on other peoples code to handle all that properly.
Perhaps this is the case, but in my opinion a competent programmer should never let a bit of code out of his or her hands that has the possibility of seg-Faulting or PMV'ng in the 1st place. It may perhaps be tedious to validate input, check your bounds, keep track of what you have asked for from the machine and make sure you give it back, but that is part of the job, and in the OP's opinion, with which I concur, programmers are beginning to forget the base fundamentals of their craft, and are relying far to heavily on OPC ( Other Peoples Code).
Unless there is physical damage to the platters, which is pretty much obvious, then you do not have to do much if it is either the spindle motor / control logic / bearing assembly or the Head Actuator / or heads themselves.
The days of having a platter dedicated to a servo track are gone, but the drive will orient itself and figure out where things are located. If you can get the platters from an old drive, into the new drive, in the correct stacking order, then on spin up, the heads should un-park, and the drive should be just as it was, and run for however long the chassis will last.
If The heads crashed into the platter(s), its another bowl of rice. At that point things get a little sticky. The new chassis will attempt to orient itself on the platter(s) but if it cannot find its synch point, then all bets are off, and you need a very special bench setup, where you can give direct commands to the drive logic, and then view the results, because you will have to re-establish synch, and that is not easy.
Allow me to DYAA (tm) ( Draw Yet Another Analogy ) for you. In my youth I sold stereo equipment, not crap but good stuff ( for the time ) and I always advised people to spend money on two things:
Phono Cartridge
Speakers
Amplifiers and Pre-Amps were all pretty damn good, class A or Class A-B with a THD of 0.005 at rated power when the input circuit was not over-driven and the final was not over-driven.
People would say, "But I need 300 watts RMS per side dont I??" and I would say, no, you need really god speakers and a really cartridge for your turntable, and might I suggest this Ortofane ?
The point is no matter how many gigapixels you have, if you lenses are shit it makes no difference. Your typical consumer level camera has a plastic lens that is about as opticaly accurate as my butt.
So spend your money on quality glass lenses
if you want truly good images of the butthead stealing your car.
To wrap up the stereo analogy, I had a 50 watt per channel McIntosh pushing a pair of Altec Lansing Voice of the Theater cabinet's and we regularly provided enough sound for a block party. Remember, it's not the watts it's speakers./p>
Since what I know about I learned in both physics class and in the US Navy when I undertook SONAR training.
I will agree that a pressure wave is a pressure wave, but does light make a sound? Depending on your POV it is either a wave or a particle, So if in the examination of light, if one considers it as a wave with a compression and rarifraction, a given frequency if you will, either as visible light or in the ultraviolet, visible or infrared spectrum, is it therefor a sound as well, or simply a pressure wave, or is it, as it has been commonly named in agreement for lo these many years, just light?
I would think that "sound" is an organic principle since only organic beings, at least as far as I know, are the only things that can perceive it as such, because we have a sensor tat will translate those pressure waves into an electrical impulse that is then perceived by an organic processor, namely the brain.
Suppose one sets up a transducer that has the capability of detecting, say the ultraviolet spectrum and then displays that spectrum on an oscilloscope. There is a medium, there must be even if light is traveling through space, their must be a source as the light exists and is detectable, it is perceived by the transducer and is shown to exist on the oscilloscope, but is it sound?
I can only conclude that is must not be, but I could be wrong.
I therefor conclude, that sound cannot exist, without an appropriate receiver that classifies it, as sound.
The reason the Pirate Bay can flagrantly post riffs on the legal threats they get is because in Sweden, what they do is legal, mainly because TPB does not actually hold any torrents, just the locations of them.
In this country at least, thats called, Aiding and abetting or quite possibly Accessory Before Fact and or Accessory After Fact or just generally an Accessory. Regardless of arguments to the contrary, one must concede that TPB does in point of fact facilitate illegal activity, as defined by statute in virtually all the jurisdictions in question.
One can argue that once believes that statutes are unjust, unfair or just plain wrong, but the law as it stands is quite clear.
Electronic Cash Registers are very inexpensive ranging from about 149.00 USD and up. Most have data ports and include software for fetching the journal.
Have a look here and you will find an inexpensive solution.
And so the old question foes, "If a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there to hear it, does it make a noise?
Well by the definition of sound there are three components:
A source
A medium to transmit is through
A detector
Hence the phrase, "In space no one can hear you scream.". Now that was a movie, but it is never the less true. We have all seen the experiment where you take an electric bell, place it in a vacuum chamber. As the air is pumped out the, softer the sound of the bell gets until it can no longer be heard.
No medium, no pressure wave, it's that simple. Now there is liquid fuel in pipes, that is being pushed hard into the combustion chamber by pumps. Ever seen what happens to a jet engine during a compressor stall? The high pressure exhaust comes out he front! YIKES, not a good thing at all. Now those pumps are pushing the liquid fuel and oxidizer into the combustion chamber against combustion pressure. The ONLY thing preventing the combusting fuel and oxidizer mix from going right back UP those pipes and making the whole damn thing blow up are the pumps. I would imagine that all sorts of pressure waves are transmitted back up into the inner working of the rocked via the medium of the fuel. Imagine if the pump "stalled" ie the pump vanes out paced the fuel supply? The pump impellers would effectively stall and pressure in the delivery lines to the combustion chamber would drop and allow back flow until the pump caught up and started pushing fuel again, I think this would definitely cause some pressure waves all over the place. It would also cause lots of vibration, perhaps enough to cause failure,
Ok, before parent gets any farther this has to be de-bunked. Sound waves did not destroy the bridge. A sound wave, in any medium consists of a compression and a rarifraction., that is a leading pressure wave followed by a area of lower pressure that propagate in a known fashion. The intensity of a sound wave obeys the inverse square law.
What happened to the Tacoma Narrows Bride was caused be an error in aerodynamic calculations on the part of the design engineer. Air passing around the bridge deck acted exactly like air does when presented with a crude airfoil, it formed an area of low pressure leeward of the bridge deck and a low pressure area leeward and below the bridge deck. Th resulting high pressure and low pressure vectors imparted a twisting moment to the bridge deck.
The twisting moment was resisted by the torsional rigidity of the bridge deck. This caused the deck to twist to and build torsional tension. The twisting caused the aerodynamic profile of the bridge deck to change. The resulting change allowed the bridge deck to revert back to its original shape and aerodynamic profile, rinse and repeat. Thus the repeated twisting caused enough of the riveted and bolted joints to fail which led to a cascade failure as the remaining joints failed under the bridges weight and twisting motion.
This was not "low frequency sound waves" although the structures oscillations did cause some very low frequency sounds waves, it was destroyed by nothing more then bad aerodynamics.
I became a parent at the age of 42 ( intentionally) and now my son is going to be 7 soon and I am looking at the half century mark looming before me. My conscious childhood was from say 1967 through 1977. Back then video games were a rare thing. As time has gone by I have watched the transition from Pong to WOW and those sorts of things.
I have serious doubt about getting my 7 year old a video game console or a DS2 or those kinds of things because I think it takes away from his experience of the real world. The lil' dude digs Pokemon, Digimon and those sorts of cards. Now playing with those have turned him into something of a math whiz (for his age) because he became very deeply interested in things like hit points and all that stuff and started doing all the math that comes along with those when he was about 5 1/2.
I watch his do incredibly imaginatively things with Lego's with his little pals. The take it apart, make it into something different time and time again. I have trouble thinking he would do the same thing with his butt parked in front of the TV with a Play Station or an XBox. He goes outside, plays soccer in the backyard and all sorts of things like that. His TV watching is very tightly limited in both time and content and so he tends to spend a lot of time playing with toys, which I think is better then spending his time sitting in front of the boob-tube.
Now I suppose you could say that I am a bad parent because I am not raising a kid that is "plugged In" and can write video drivers for Linux. Well I will take that hit, its ok. He will get a computer ( more then likely a mac ) and it will be in the family room for him to use with mom or dad keeping a loose eye on him. Perhaps even a game console when he is older that we can enjoy together, but time on that will be limited as well.
"Trying to bridge the digital divide in Canada's poorest postal code, a principled group of hackers adopt "open source"-based technology spun off from an MIT project. Then the terms on the hardware are changed, and changed again, and then firmware to lock out the frustrated group's software is installed, screwing them out of their investment and many hours of development work."
I guess our beloved Cmd Taco has bever heard of the basic Who, What, Where, When of writing an article.
Gracious words go so much farther than an apology, but I accept it in the vein it is given, which I believe to be sincere and indeed gracious.
In precise terms I agree with your assertion that it is indeed copyright infringement. My point is that binary code, source code, a book, or other creative work that is transportable via media that is commonly used for the dissemination is real property, not just intellectual property and should be treated as such because I believe that in essence everything that an entity creates is in point of fact an intellectual property because the very existence of the object derives from the mind of its creator, irrespective of its realized form.
That the property is owned by an individual or a corporate entity is irrelevant to the notion of its value. A software program or a book about writing programs by say, Knuth is still valuable property.
Frame the debate in those terms and I think the conclusion is inescapable, but I welcome vigorous debate on the subject.
I suggest you read up a little. I have included for your perusal section 502 of the California Penal Code, which points out, quite clearly, that is is theft and is punishable by a $10,000.00 fine and or up to 16 months in state prison, but read for yourself California Penal Code Sections 484-502.9
It never ceases to amaze me when people like you attack any argument that gives those who create software ownership and therefor the right to control the dissemination of that software in the way they see fit. You are quite free to write a program that performs in a way that people find valuable and then give it away for free and that is your right and I for one would not even dream of infringing on that right. But for people to say they have a right to give away, regardless of the entity that created it, and to further break mechanisms that are explicitly intended to control the dissemination of a software product, is completely and utterly devoid of any possible supportive argument(s).
MANY people do create software that they actively encourage to be given away and distributed in any manner possible. This is what FOSS is all about, and I applaud it, and I use it (yes I am writing this on a SUSE System, using FireFox ) I also use closed source proprietary software that I pay for, normally after I have used an evaluation version or have heard from colleagues is suitable to that task that I need to perform.
Have I let others come and sit in front of my computer and use said licensed software, yes many times. Is that sort of borderline, quite possibly. I really appreciated the old Borland "No nonsense License Agreement" which in essence said, and I am paraphrasing here, "Treat this software just like a book, make as many copies as you like, install it on as many computers as like as long as only one copy is being used at any one time". It was simple and relied on the honesty of the person who purchased the software. No activation codes, no phoning home, nothing, just buy it, install it and use it.
A note to your side note... This has nothing to do with copyright infringement, it has to do with having a non-licensed copy of the software installed on your machine. Like it or not, it is theft. They grant you a license to use the product based upon a given price. You don't like that price, then use any of the other CAD tools out there. There are lots of $free$ ones and very low cost ones out there. But to obtain a copy of AutoDesk's software, that has had their authorization scheme crippled, and then install it on your computer, is theft, pure and simple.
As to students... EVERY software company out there that makes hi-end hi-priced software practically gives it away to students who are enrolled in school, so again the assertion that theft is ok in that regard is specious.
Do many companies turn a blind eye? Yes they do; however, that does not alter in anyway the fact that pirating software is simply theft.
Also, I have a friend who was a furniture designer/maker, on a low level. As he had been talking about it, I grabbed him something like Autocad (can't remember now) as a favour. He now runs a business where I figure they have half a dozen licensed versions. He'd still be in his shed knocking up one chair at a time if it wasn't for 'Piracy'.
Does he, or is he simply installing the copy you stole from AutoCad on his new computers?
Thats the problem with thieves like you. You just don't care, to you its "Ohh I am just taking care of a buddy, how nice of me..". Let us presume he now has 5 new workstations and he installed the cracked AutoCad on each one. Autocad sells for about what $700.00 per copy, so thats about 3500.00 in revenue that Autocad cant use to pay its bills, fund further development, etc. etc. the whole litany of why what you are doing is just plain theft. How much more money is this guy making because of your theft? Lets say he quadrupled his income? So now he is making 4x more based on theft. If he has purchased licenses than he is an honest person, and god on him, but if he has not, then you are both guilty of theft. This is why they go after you for more then just the cost of the software, because your theft of property is now translated into profits that would have not been realized without theft, and therefor should be forfeit . It is called "Ill Gotten Gains".
You sound liek a spammer to me. If you are I really do hope you go to a federal recreation facility and room with a guy named "Buba" who really likes you.
The people that think there is nothing wrong with simply giving away material wont listen to your well founded and quite true argument.
They want to rant on about how Nine Inch Nails and whoever the other band was that decided to allow the download of their work for "You decide how much" fail to mention that those guys are already quite wealthy and they made their money from doing things with the "Evil Record Companies".
I have made all those arguments and others but the people who think they are above the law and that "Information wants to be Free man!!!" don't care and wont until someone kicks down their door and hauls them off in cuffs, or... They do something that sells huge and they watch their $$profit$$ getting siphoned off by the same illegal file sharing and then just watch their tune change.
If you go to a book store, purchase a copy of "Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy", then go to Kinko's ( or whatever your local equivalent is ) copy every page including the front and back covers, get all neatly collated and stapled then go give it to a friend are you doing something illegal?
Put them in a team and they will be forced to code to the same level of drivel as the rest of the monkeys or it is endless debates over what should be contained in a class, or some other such crap. Most of the best code started with a single coder and after the base functionality and model were established it was given to a team to maintain.
The biggest problem with "team coding" is that too many chefs spoil the soup! Look at the pure mediocrity that has come from these practices. Linus controls the kernel, period, end of discussion. Others may suggest additions, modifications and deletions, but it does not happen until Linus makes it happen. That is why the Linux Kernel has been so steady and reliable.>/p>
Yes it is draconian and it is not without cause. Last year they had an employee who managed to get hold of the local administrator PW for his workstation. He managed to install some bit of crap that just took the network to its knees for about 4 hours while it when tried to infect the whole shop. Fortunately AV was in place ( he disabled his as the local administrator policy allowed that ) and kept it contained. He didn't fess-up as the IT team went on the search to find the problem, 4 hours later problem was solved, but that cost the company in round numbers ( 4 * 130 * ( average billable rate for the firm is around $200.00 per hour) so call it $100K right in the middle of tax season. Now you can play that number down, but it was 4 hours lost that cannot be made up since clients don't want to be told, "Uhmm sorry, we had a little problem today that put us a half a day behind the power curve and now we have to put you on extension". After the dust cleared, he was terminated the next day.
At accounting firms, during tax season, anything less then 99.9% uptime is pretty much unacceptable.
On the subject of Aero.
I would suggest that having 30 tasks open and being worked simultaneously does not represent you average business user. I have been in this business for coming up on 30 years, and I have yet to see a business user have more the 4 or 5 programs running at once. If you are a finance type, all your math is done on a calculator the provides a tape, because you attach it to the work papers. And I agree that there are undoubtedly a few widgets that make sense for some business users, but I cannot really see that many.
IT's job in general...
I agree with many of your points. Some IT departments have lost sight of the goal of providing a "Useful & Reliable" set of tools for a person to accomplish the tasks that they are assigned. I think that "Useful & Reliable" is something that must be defined by all three components, Management, Users and IT:
Your average 20 something collage grad, who's laptop is more then likely loaded with just about every IM client, video / mpx player that have been accumulated through collage will define "useful & Reliable" as pretty much, "Whatever I want it to be.."
Your average older business owner's ( we are talking late 40's or older ) define it as "Sufficiently advanced to accomplish the goals of the company without impacting the bottom line more then required.
Your average IT guy defines it as, "OK you want reliable, you want MAXIMUM uptime, don't even talk about downtime from Jan 1st through Jun 30th" then I control what goes on the machines, I control when and how."
Hopefully you find a reasonable balance and everyone is happy, but as the old saying goes, "You can make some of the people happy all of the time, or all of the people happy some of the time, but you cant make everyone happy all the time!"
Good god I wish I could build a bomb-proof workstation AND give the user all the flexibility they want! Unfortunately this magical machine has yet to arrive anywhere. Not in Windows, Not in Linux, not in OS-X, not even with old dumb terminals hooked up big iron. Who's closer? I don't even try to guess anymore. Linux is pretty damn secure, but the dearth of business applications is killing it on the desktop. Windows, well I always feel like the little Dutch Boy with my finger in the dike, except the dike is made of Swiss Cheese and all the other wholes are covered, but with tissue paper. OS-X well I feel secure, it looks really great but the problem is the same, albeit not as bad, as Linux, not enough business applications, but its getting closer faster, then Linux is by a long shot.
EDirectory... Hmm think AD except far better and it runs on pretty much every platform you can buy.
My summary is what Management wants are happy productive employees. IT wants happy computers. Somewhere in the middle is a happy employee w
I was painfully truthful, I laid out the entire upside/downside. To give an example, one was an accounting firm w/ +-130 desktops. They are not in an AD environment, they are in an Edir environment. They are all running XPsp2 with one common desktop user for every machine, that way each user can work at any vacant desk, they get the same set of app's. E-Mail client loads from the server, no local PST files, nothing makes the machines unique and although it took a lot of trial and error, we made their tax-prep, time & billing software all run with only user level security.
Now at some point there yes new machine will have ONLY Vista, but hopefully by then Vista will be on sp2 and be something worth using.
I still see absolutely no reason for Aero in a business environment. These are not play toys, these are tools for employee's to use and as such Aero provides no value, only additional resource requirements, just generally slows everything down and gets in the way. As to UAC it is pretty pointless as these machines are locked down hard and I have encouraged these companies to implement IT policies that say in nice terms, You install software, you are fired, thats what we pay the IT people for and you are specifically not authorized to do so. Yeah its draconian but these companies were pushed to that extreme by stupid users who tried to or installed any bit of virus spreading, mal-ware installing, root-kitting bit of garbage from places like Facebook, Yahoo, MySpace
These are NOTpersonal computers they are the companies computers. You want a utility, an additional tool, then make the business case, put it in writing and in about 99% percent of the cases you get it, after its been vetted by the IT guys. When down time costs upwards of $200.00 per hour, per employee, company owners tend to be a tad touchy about this stuff.
Although I have not read the CLASS documents, this is coming from the consumer side. These are people that are not IT professionals. I am an IT professional, and when I did the very same research you did, I told every customer I had, "Look, what Vista is bringing to the table, you really don't need". The people you have working for you perform about 4 basic functions. a) They type up documents. b) They do basic spreadsheets, nothing fancy nothing remotely resembling complicated. c) They do e-mail correspondence. d) they do minor web research.
I told them 95% of your machines will require a memory upgrade and a new video card, since the on-board video system will not handle Aero and with parts and labor that is going to cost you about $300.00 per machine so that's going to be around $30K PLUS the upgrade licenses, training costs, etc. To a client, they all said, "And I would do this why?".
On the consumer side, all they see is "Vista Capable". Now if they had stickers like "Vista Capable but NOT vista premium Capable" that might have made consumers step back and say "Huh, what you talking about Willis?". Their own e-mail exchanges ( which I have read ) clearly indicate that they knew the marketing was going to confuse the crap about of your average consumer, that they knew the Intel video chip-set was "No Go" but they made the decision to push forward anyway, even after one of their own said, "I now have a $2100.00 e-mail machine", with no printer drivers, no Aero, none of the "WOW" that was being heavily advertised and promoted as the lunchpin of their upgrade sales strategy.
Microsoft really really put shit out there that is now coming around to bite them in the ass, and deservedly so.
The groups that want to shut porn down ( as a legitimate business anyway ) are just crapping their pants to get this very thing done. At that point they can legislate that nothing even remotely resembling erotica MUST be on an XXX domain. After that its not a big leap to simply block out the entire domain.
You know what, I have been trying to have a reasonable conversation with you. But it is quite clear that you are incapable of that. You are the type of person who simply wants to show off. You know what you little fucking karma-whore, go fuck yourself. You are quite clearly what is very very wrong with/. I am not normally prone to violence, but for you I would make an exception. Buh-Bye asshole.
Do you any concept at all what a Just In Time Compiler is? The JVM has absolutely no problem linking to an fopen() call because it compiles the code into native instructions. The reason why it's faster is because it can optimize that native code at runtime. i.e. It can take the results of runtime profiling and recompile the source into a different code path. That code path can execute for as long as the JVM detects that it is valid. The moment the JVM detects that it is invalid, it can recompile with a more general code path.
Then what is the point of having a Virtual Machine? If JIT compiles JAVA to native code and allows it to execute outside the boundaries of the VM, then what is the point of even having a VM? Perhaps this is a wording problem? To me a Virtual Machine allows the underlying architecture to isolate anything running in the VM.
And if the JIT is that hot, then why bother with the rest of the cruft? Why not Simply JIT the code and launch it native and abandon the notion of a VM?
In other words what does the VM get me?
With all the optimizations that JIT can do, how come it is not a stand-alone native compiler?
Are you saying that in the middle of execution post _JIT, that the VM will simply halt application, roll everything back or save the state of the application, recompile the code ( I am assuming a new executable image is created ) reset all the data and then relaunch at the last know Instruction Pointer? How can that be if the code has recompiled since all kinds of code is now very different?
Slashdot Mirror
Well I agree & disagree with you...
Bring from the old school of programing, I am quite literally programmed to never, ever, allocate without making damn sure I de-allocate.
The same thing goes for stuffing anything into arrays, doubly so for arrays of string, or any kind of buffer. Always check to see that you are not overflowing, the time penalty is not that critical, but failing to check and overflowing will be the thing that brings your code to a screaming halt, if not the entire box, depending on how low level the code is you are writing.
An argument can be made such as, "Its Java and I don't allocate memory directly but on the other hand you do allocate entire new objects and all of those have impact on memory. We rely on other peoples code to handle all that properly.
Perhaps this is the case, but in my opinion a competent programmer should never let a bit of code out of his or her hands that has the possibility of seg-Faulting or PMV'ng in the 1st place. It may perhaps be tedious to validate input, check your bounds, keep track of what you have asked for from the machine and make sure you give it back, but that is part of the job, and in the OP's opinion, with which I concur, programmers are beginning to forget the base fundamentals of their craft, and are relying far to heavily on OPC ( Other Peoples Code).
Unless there is physical damage to the platters, which is pretty much obvious, then you do not have to do much if it is either the spindle motor / control logic / bearing assembly or the Head Actuator / or heads themselves.
The days of having a platter dedicated to a servo track are gone, but the drive will orient itself and figure out where things are located. If you can get the platters from an old drive, into the new drive, in the correct stacking order, then on spin up, the heads should un-park, and the drive should be just as it was, and run for however long the chassis will last.
If The heads crashed into the platter(s), its another bowl of rice. At that point things get a little sticky. The new chassis will attempt to orient itself on the platter(s) but if it cannot find its synch point, then all bets are off, and you need a very special bench setup, where you can give direct commands to the drive logic, and then view the results, because you will have to re-establish synch, and that is not easy.
Allow me to DYAA (tm) ( Draw Yet Another Analogy ) for you. In my youth I sold stereo equipment, not crap but good stuff ( for the time ) and I always advised people to spend money on two things:
Amplifiers and Pre-Amps were all pretty damn good, class A or Class A-B with a THD of 0.005 at rated power when the input circuit was not over-driven and the final was not over-driven.
People would say, "But I need 300 watts RMS per side dont I??" and I would say, no, you need really god speakers and a really cartridge for your turntable, and might I suggest this Ortofane ?
The point is no matter how many gigapixels you have, if you lenses are shit it makes no difference. Your typical consumer level camera has a plastic lens that is about as opticaly accurate as my butt.
So spend your money on quality glass lenses
if you want truly good images of the butthead stealing your car.To wrap up the stereo analogy, I had a 50 watt per channel McIntosh pushing a pair of Altec Lansing Voice of the Theater cabinet's and we regularly provided enough sound for a block party. Remember, it's not the watts it's speakers./p>
Not so sure of that....
Since what I know about I learned in both physics class and in the US Navy when I undertook SONAR training.
I will agree that a pressure wave is a pressure wave, but does light make a sound? Depending on your POV it is either a wave or a particle, So if in the examination of light, if one considers it as a wave with a compression and rarifraction, a given frequency if you will, either as visible light or in the ultraviolet, visible or infrared spectrum, is it therefor a sound as well, or simply a pressure wave, or is it, as it has been commonly named in agreement for lo these many years, just light?
I would think that "sound" is an organic principle since only organic beings, at least as far as I know, are the only things that can perceive it as such, because we have a sensor tat will translate those pressure waves into an electrical impulse that is then perceived by an organic processor, namely the brain.
Suppose one sets up a transducer that has the capability of detecting, say the ultraviolet spectrum and then displays that spectrum on an oscilloscope. There is a medium, there must be even if light is traveling through space, their must be a source as the light exists and is detectable, it is perceived by the transducer and is shown to exist on the oscilloscope, but is it sound?
I can only conclude that is must not be, but I could be wrong.
I therefor conclude, that sound cannot exist, without an appropriate receiver that classifies it, as sound.
Dubito, ergo cogito, ergo sum
If that bit of logic only held true...
The reason the Pirate Bay can flagrantly post riffs on the legal threats they get is because in Sweden, what they do is legal, mainly because TPB does not actually hold any torrents, just the locations of them.In this country at least, thats called, Aiding and abetting or quite possibly Accessory Before Fact and or Accessory After Fact or just generally an Accessory. Regardless of arguments to the contrary, one must concede that TPB does in point of fact facilitate illegal activity, as defined by statute in virtually all the jurisdictions in question.
One can argue that once believes that statutes are unjust, unfair or just plain wrong, but the law as it stands is quite clear.
Electronic Cash Registers are very inexpensive ranging from about 149.00 USD and up. Most have data ports and include software for fetching the journal.
Have a look here and you will find an inexpensive solution.
And so the old question foes, "If a tree falls in the forest and there is no one there to hear it, does it make a noise?
Well by the definition of sound there are three components:
Hence the phrase, "In space no one can hear you scream.". Now that was a movie, but it is never the less true. We have all seen the experiment where you take an electric bell, place it in a vacuum chamber. As the air is pumped out the, softer the sound of the bell gets until it can no longer be heard.
No medium, no pressure wave, it's that simple. Now there is liquid fuel in pipes, that is being pushed hard into the combustion chamber by pumps. Ever seen what happens to a jet engine during a compressor stall? The high pressure exhaust comes out he front! YIKES, not a good thing at all. Now those pumps are pushing the liquid fuel and oxidizer into the combustion chamber against combustion pressure. The ONLY thing preventing the combusting fuel and oxidizer mix from going right back UP those pipes and making the whole damn thing blow up are the pumps. I would imagine that all sorts of pressure waves are transmitted back up into the inner working of the rocked via the medium of the fuel. Imagine if the pump "stalled" ie the pump vanes out paced the fuel supply? The pump impellers would effectively stall and pressure in the delivery lines to the combustion chamber would drop and allow back flow until the pump caught up and started pushing fuel again, I think this would definitely cause some pressure waves all over the place. It would also cause lots of vibration, perhaps enough to cause failure,
Ok, before parent gets any farther this has to be de-bunked. Sound waves did not destroy the bridge. A sound wave, in any medium consists of a compression and a rarifraction ., that is a leading pressure wave followed by a area of lower pressure that propagate in a known fashion. The intensity of a sound wave obeys the inverse square law.
What happened to the Tacoma Narrows Bride was caused be an error in aerodynamic calculations on the part of the design engineer. Air passing around the bridge deck acted exactly like air does when presented with a crude airfoil, it formed an area of low pressure leeward of the bridge deck and a low pressure area leeward and below the bridge deck. Th resulting high pressure and low pressure vectors imparted a twisting moment to the bridge deck.
The twisting moment was resisted by the torsional rigidity of the bridge deck. This caused the deck to twist to and build torsional tension. The twisting caused the aerodynamic profile of the bridge deck to change. The resulting change allowed the bridge deck to revert back to its original shape and aerodynamic profile, rinse and repeat. Thus the repeated twisting caused enough of the riveted and bolted joints to fail which led to a cascade failure as the remaining joints failed under the bridges weight and twisting motion.
This was not "low frequency sound waves" although the structures oscillations did cause some very low frequency sounds waves, it was destroyed by nothing more then bad aerodynamics.
I became a parent at the age of 42 ( intentionally) and now my son is going to be 7 soon and I am looking at the half century mark looming before me. My conscious childhood was from say 1967 through 1977. Back then video games were a rare thing. As time has gone by I have watched the transition from Pong to WOW and those sorts of things.
I have serious doubt about getting my 7 year old a video game console or a DS2 or those kinds of things because I think it takes away from his experience of the real world. The lil' dude digs Pokemon, Digimon and those sorts of cards. Now playing with those have turned him into something of a math whiz (for his age) because he became very deeply interested in things like hit points and all that stuff and started doing all the math that comes along with those when he was about 5 1/2.
I watch his do incredibly imaginatively things with Lego's with his little pals. The take it apart, make it into something different time and time again. I have trouble thinking he would do the same thing with his butt parked in front of the TV with a Play Station or an XBox. He goes outside, plays soccer in the backyard and all sorts of things like that. His TV watching is very tightly limited in both time and content and so he tends to spend a lot of time playing with toys, which I think is better then spending his time sitting in front of the boob-tube.
Now I suppose you could say that I am a bad parent because I am not raising a kid that is "plugged In" and can write video drivers for Linux. Well I will take that hit, its ok. He will get a computer ( more then likely a mac ) and it will be in the family room for him to use with mom or dad keeping a loose eye on him. Perhaps even a game console when he is older that we can enjoy together, but time on that will be limited as well.
summary I have seen on /. to date!"
"Trying to bridge the digital divide in Canada's poorest postal code, a principled group of hackers adopt "open source"-based technology spun off from an MIT project. Then the terms on the hardware are changed, and changed again, and then firmware to lock out the frustrated group's software is installed, screwing them out of their investment and many hours of development work."I guess our beloved Cmd Taco has bever heard of the basic Who, What, Where, When of writing an article.
Gracious words go so much farther than an apology, but I accept it in the vein it is given, which I believe to be sincere and indeed gracious.
In precise terms I agree with your assertion that it is indeed copyright infringement. My point is that binary code, source code, a book, or other creative work that is transportable via media that is commonly used for the dissemination is real property, not just intellectual property and should be treated as such because I believe that in essence everything that an entity creates is in point of fact an intellectual property because the very existence of the object derives from the mind of its creator, irrespective of its realized form.
That the property is owned by an individual or a corporate entity is irrelevant to the notion of its value. A software program or a book about writing programs by say, Knuth is still valuable property.
Frame the debate in those terms and I think the conclusion is inescapable, but I welcome vigorous debate on the subject.
Best Regards
FG
I am neither and it is you who are ignorant.
I suggest you read up a little. I have included for your perusal section 502 of the California Penal Code, which points out, quite clearly, that is is theft and is punishable by a $10,000.00 fine and or up to 16 months in state prison, but read for yourself California Penal Code Sections 484-502.9
It never ceases to amaze me when people like you attack any argument that gives those who create software ownership and therefor the right to control the dissemination of that software in the way they see fit. You are quite free to write a program that performs in a way that people find valuable and then give it away for free and that is your right and I for one would not even dream of infringing on that right. But for people to say they have a right to give away, regardless of the entity that created it, and to further break mechanisms that are explicitly intended to control the dissemination of a software product, is completely and utterly devoid of any possible supportive argument(s).
MANY people do create software that they actively encourage to be given away and distributed in any manner possible. This is what FOSS is all about, and I applaud it, and I use it (yes I am writing this on a SUSE System, using FireFox ) I also use closed source proprietary software that I pay for, normally after I have used an evaluation version or have heard from colleagues is suitable to that task that I need to perform.
Have I let others come and sit in front of my computer and use said licensed software, yes many times. Is that sort of borderline, quite possibly. I really appreciated the old Borland "No nonsense License Agreement" which in essence said, and I am paraphrasing here, "Treat this software just like a book, make as many copies as you like, install it on as many computers as like as long as only one copy is being used at any one time". It was simple and relied on the honesty of the person who purchased the software. No activation codes, no phoning home, nothing, just buy it, install it and use it.
A note to your side note... This has nothing to do with copyright infringement, it has to do with having a non-licensed copy of the software installed on your machine. Like it or not, it is theft. They grant you a license to use the product based upon a given price. You don't like that price, then use any of the other CAD tools out there. There are lots of $free$ ones and very low cost ones out there. But to obtain a copy of AutoDesk's software, that has had their authorization scheme crippled, and then install it on your computer, is theft, pure and simple.
As to students... EVERY software company out there that makes hi-end hi-priced software practically gives it away to students who are enrolled in school, so again the assertion that theft is ok in that regard is specious.
Do many companies turn a blind eye? Yes they do; however, that does not alter in anyway the fact that pirating software is simply theft.
Does he, or is he simply installing the copy you stole from AutoCad on his new computers?
Thats the problem with thieves like you. You just don't care, to you its "Ohh I am just taking care of a buddy, how nice of me..". Let us presume he now has 5 new workstations and he installed the cracked AutoCad on each one. Autocad sells for about what $700.00 per copy, so thats about 3500.00 in revenue that Autocad cant use to pay its bills, fund further development, etc. etc. the whole litany of why what you are doing is just plain theft. How much more money is this guy making because of your theft? Lets say he quadrupled his income? So now he is making 4x more based on theft. If he has purchased licenses than he is an honest person, and god on him, but if he has not, then you are both guilty of theft. This is why they go after you for more then just the cost of the software, because your theft of property is now translated into profits that would have not been realized without theft, and therefor should be forfeit . It is called "Ill Gotten Gains" .
You sound liek a spammer to me. If you are I really do hope you go to a federal recreation facility and room with a guy named "Buba" who really likes you.
Don't waste your typing time...
The people that think there is nothing wrong with simply giving away material wont listen to your well founded and quite true argument.
They want to rant on about how Nine Inch Nails and whoever the other band was that decided to allow the download of their work for "You decide how much" fail to mention that those guys are already quite wealthy and they made their money from doing things with the "Evil Record Companies".
I have made all those arguments and others but the people who think they are above the law and that "Information wants to be Free man!!!" don't care and wont until someone kicks down their door and hauls them off in cuffs, or... They do something that sells huge and they watch their $$profit$$ getting siphoned off by the same illegal file sharing and then just watch their tune change.
OK, so here is a question for you....
If you go to a book store, purchase a copy of "Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy", then go to Kinko's ( or whatever your local equivalent is ) copy every page including the front and back covers, get all neatly collated and stapled then go give it to a friend are you doing something illegal?
Put them in a team and they will be forced to code to the same level of drivel as the rest of the monkeys or it is endless debates over what should be contained in a class, or some other such crap. Most of the best code started with a single coder and after the base functionality and model were established it was given to a team to maintain.
The biggest problem with "team coding" is that too many chefs spoil the soup! Look at the pure mediocrity that has come from these practices. Linus controls the kernel, period, end of discussion. Others may suggest additions, modifications and deletions, but it does not happen until Linus makes it happen. That is why the Linux Kernel has been so steady and reliable.>/p>
This is a great discussion!
Yes it is draconian and it is not without cause. Last year they had an employee who managed to get hold of the local administrator PW for his workstation. He managed to install some bit of crap that just took the network to its knees for about 4 hours while it when tried to infect the whole shop. Fortunately AV was in place ( he disabled his as the local administrator policy allowed that ) and kept it contained. He didn't fess-up as the IT team went on the search to find the problem, 4 hours later problem was solved, but that cost the company in round numbers ( 4 * 130 * ( average billable rate for the firm is around $200.00 per hour) so call it $100K right in the middle of tax season. Now you can play that number down, but it was 4 hours lost that cannot be made up since clients don't want to be told, "Uhmm sorry, we had a little problem today that put us a half a day behind the power curve and now we have to put you on extension". After the dust cleared, he was terminated the next day.
At accounting firms, during tax season, anything less then 99.9% uptime is pretty much unacceptable.
On the subject of Aero.
I would suggest that having 30 tasks open and being worked simultaneously does not represent you average business user. I have been in this business for coming up on 30 years, and I have yet to see a business user have more the 4 or 5 programs running at once. If you are a finance type, all your math is done on a calculator the provides a tape, because you attach it to the work papers. And I agree that there are undoubtedly a few widgets that make sense for some business users, but I cannot really see that many.
IT's job in general...
I agree with many of your points. Some IT departments have lost sight of the goal of providing a "Useful & Reliable" set of tools for a person to accomplish the tasks that they are assigned. I think that "Useful & Reliable" is something that must be defined by all three components, Management, Users and IT:
Hopefully you find a reasonable balance and everyone is happy, but as the old saying goes, "You can make some of the people happy all of the time, or all of the people happy some of the time, but you cant make everyone happy all the time!"
Good god I wish I could build a bomb-proof workstation AND give the user all the flexibility they want! Unfortunately this magical machine has yet to arrive anywhere. Not in Windows, Not in Linux, not in OS-X, not even with old dumb terminals hooked up big iron. Who's closer? I don't even try to guess anymore. Linux is pretty damn secure, but the dearth of business applications is killing it on the desktop. Windows, well I always feel like the little Dutch Boy with my finger in the dike, except the dike is made of Swiss Cheese and all the other wholes are covered, but with tissue paper. OS-X well I feel secure, it looks really great but the problem is the same, albeit not as bad, as Linux, not enough business applications, but its getting closer faster, then Linux is by a long shot.
EDirectory... Hmm think AD except far better and it runs on pretty much every platform you can buy.
My summary is what Management wants are happy productive employees. IT wants happy computers. Somewhere in the middle is a happy employee w
I was painfully truthful, I laid out the entire upside/downside. To give an example, one was an accounting firm w/ +-130 desktops. They are not in an AD environment, they are in an Edir environment. They are all running XPsp2 with one common desktop user for every machine, that way each user can work at any vacant desk, they get the same set of app's. E-Mail client loads from the server, no local PST files, nothing makes the machines unique and although it took a lot of trial and error, we made their tax-prep, time & billing software all run with only user level security.
Now at some point there yes new machine will have ONLY Vista, but hopefully by then Vista will be on sp2 and be something worth using.
I still see absolutely no reason for Aero in a business environment. These are not play toys, these are tools for employee's to use and as such Aero provides no value, only additional resource requirements, just generally slows everything down and gets in the way. As to UAC it is pretty pointless as these machines are locked down hard and I have encouraged these companies to implement IT policies that say in nice terms, You install software, you are fired, thats what we pay the IT people for and you are specifically not authorized to do so. Yeah its draconian but these companies were pushed to that extreme by stupid users who tried to or installed any bit of virus spreading, mal-ware installing, root-kitting bit of garbage from places like Facebook, Yahoo, MySpace
These are NOT personal computers they are the companies computers. You want a utility, an additional tool, then make the business case, put it in writing and in about 99% percent of the cases you get it, after its been vetted by the IT guys. When down time costs upwards of $200.00 per hour, per employee, company owners tend to be a tad touchy about this stuff.
Although I have not read the CLASS documents, this is coming from the consumer side. These are people that are not IT professionals. I am an IT professional, and when I did the very same research you did, I told every customer I had, "Look, what Vista is bringing to the table, you really don't need". The people you have working for you perform about 4 basic functions. a) They type up documents. b) They do basic spreadsheets, nothing fancy nothing remotely resembling complicated. c) They do e-mail correspondence. d) they do minor web research.
I told them 95% of your machines will require a memory upgrade and a new video card, since the on-board video system will not handle Aero and with parts and labor that is going to cost you about $300.00 per machine so that's going to be around $30K PLUS the upgrade licenses, training costs, etc. To a client, they all said, "And I would do this why?".
On the consumer side, all they see is "Vista Capable". Now if they had stickers like "Vista Capable but NOT vista premium Capable" that might have made consumers step back and say "Huh, what you talking about Willis?". Their own e-mail exchanges ( which I have read ) clearly indicate that they knew the marketing was going to confuse the crap about of your average consumer, that they knew the Intel video chip-set was "No Go" but they made the decision to push forward anyway, even after one of their own said, "I now have a $2100.00 e-mail machine", with no printer drivers, no Aero, none of the "WOW" that was being heavily advertised and promoted as the lunchpin of their upgrade sales strategy.Microsoft really really put shit out there that is now coming around to bite them in the ass, and deservedly so.
Be careful what you ask for.
The groups that want to shut porn down ( as a legitimate business anyway ) are just crapping their pants to get this very thing done. At that point they can legislate that nothing even remotely resembling erotica MUST be on an XXX domain. After that its not a big leap to simply block out the entire domain.
Uhmmm no, I am a parent, you are simply an asshole who thinks its cute to correct other peoples spelling. Get a life.
You know what, I have been trying to have a reasonable conversation with you. But it is quite clear that you are incapable of that. You are the type of person who simply wants to show off. You know what you little fucking karma-whore, go fuck yourself. You are quite clearly what is very very wrong with /. I am not normally prone to violence, but for you I would make an exception. Buh-Bye asshole.
Then what is the point of having a Virtual Machine? If JIT compiles JAVA to native code and allows it to execute outside the boundaries of the VM, then what is the point of even having a VM? Perhaps this is a wording problem? To me a Virtual Machine allows the underlying architecture to isolate anything running in the VM.
And if the JIT is that hot, then why bother with the rest of the cruft? Why not Simply JIT the code and launch it native and abandon the notion of a VM?
In other words what does the VM get me?
With all the optimizations that JIT can do, how come it is not a stand-alone native compiler?
Are you saying that in the middle of execution post _JIT, that the VM will simply halt application, roll everything back or save the state of the application, recompile the code ( I am assuming a new executable image is created ) reset all the data and then relaunch at the last know Instruction Pointer? How can that be if the code has recompiled since all kinds of code is now very different?