Oh I don't think there's anything new about this. I'm just saying if your average student doesn't think geometry or algebra is relevant they definitely won't get the point of a turing machine or the like.
Four years teaching algebra? In my school system they taught pre algebra in 7th grade (which could be considered part of algebra), algebra in 8th grade, and after that it was geometry, trig, pre-calc, and calc. That means 1 (2 if you count pre-alg) year of algebra. And I grew up in Idaho, for heaven's sake. We're not the math capital of the world by any means.
In junior high many kids think algebra and geometry are irrelevant to life, and things they'll never use. There's no way they'd see Turing machines, state machines, regular expressions, etc as remotely relevant. They wouldn't be motivated enough to really tackle it, even if they are plenty capable mentally.
Right. I wish I could agree with that. I got a macbook pro. The power adapter was defective when it came, and Apple happily replaced that. I was glad.
Then I left it alone at a friend's house, and they had a family with a toddler come visit.
She ripped my left shift key off and rendered it useless. No idea how, I wasn't there. But here's the kicker:
Apple won't replace it without replacing the entire keyboard for $283. I called customer service 5 times hoping to get a sane representative that would just send me the key so I could put it on myself. Each time I ended up visiting their supervisors, and their answer was "sorry, you have to send your machine in and get the keyboard replaced for $283."
None of them could just send me a darn shift key. I just want the key, I can do the rest myself. With any other vendor, replacing my shift key would have been simple. Hell I can get a cheap laptop for $283.
I'm torn. I really enjoy my Apple (even though I use Linux on it), but with this kind of customer service I think I'd be better with a generic PC.
That assumes they take the same path we did towards tools and technology. I'd think a successful path towards technology would be very different under water since there are huge differences in so very many environmental conditions. Many of them would make it harder to do things we do on land, but many would make it easier to do things we couldn't on land.
I did some freelance for a game development firm, and deleting an 800 mb folder and copying it off a flash drive required about half an hour on a quad core system with 4 gigs of ram with a 500 gig Sata2 hard drive(under Vista). I was stunned such basic functionality was so severely defective compared to much older machines running XP.
Vista doesn't do everything wrong, it's not that bad - but it does do enough things terribly, terribly wrong that I just prefer XP if I have to use Windows.
This makes plenty of sense. I've personally dealt with several IBM BlueGene supercomputers (more than 200,000 cores) that didn't perform near this well.
The GPUs definitely made a huge difference in this case.
Name one game that runs well with WINE or Crossover on Linux that doesn't run under WINE or Crossover on OS X. Name one commercial game available for Linux but not OS X.
Actually running Ragnarok Online (to name just one example), especially with private servers, is nigh impossible on OSX but pretty easy in Linux, and there are quite a few more. OSX's wine doesn't support OpenGL without compiling tons of external things (and lots of upgrades to Quartz et al), and even then it isn't detected correctly by many programs without yet more hideous modifications.
I can't name any more examples because I gave up after trying that game and would just boot into Linux if I needed to use Wine for anything that needed sound or 3D.
I'm not sure why you'd think going to Apple would be any better. You get the exact same business tactics, just a slightly more stylish computer.
This is an absolutely true statement, but it overlooks one thing: the unfair advantage that is monopoly status and industry entrenchment.
I support open source because it's hard to leverage unfairly, but when I have to choose between Microsoft and Apple I choose Apple because they're the underdog.
When Microsoft's market share reaches 50% or less on desktop OSes and browsers, I'll re-evaluate my stance. They have the same business practices as Apple, but they have far more power until the ecosystem evens out, so they are capable of much more abuse.
I agree scripting is a really powerful thing, but I think it's important people don't view GUI and scripting as a dichotomy.
Linux is critiqued often on how often people use scripting instead of the GUI, and OSX is critiqued often on how often ease of use (GUI functionality) is sacrificed at the expense of power (scriptability).
Both are just misconceptions most of the time. Many Linux scripts can be replaced with sequences of GUI clicks, and many "inaccessible" things in OSX can be solved with scripting (showing hidden files in finder...). It's time people concede that both are useful. I mean, if we're saying iTunes has feature X because all you have to do is execute a few scripts in we should probably concede GUIs aren't the end all, or if they are then perhaps even Apple hasn't solved the problem completely.
I'm a proud Linux and Apple user. Since I know how to program and script I tend to prefer Linux, which is perhaps a reason I tend to prefer Linux apps, but I think each has its place (in a purely GUI sense) depending on audience.
I have introduced plenty of mostly-Windows newbies to OSX, Gnome, and KDE, and in general their affinity has been even over the 3. Almost all said something along the lines of "I'm used to Windows, but after I take a second, I get this."
Nope. I want Amarok. I want last.fm capability. I want the use of my library, but not to be restricted to it. I want the lyrics and artist info from wikipedia it gives me.
I want the option of using my music player like I used to use Winamp or like many use iTunes, depending on my mood.
So far Amarok has been the only player that has managed to do all the above without frustrating the shit out of me. I didn't think I'd ever find the best of both worlds, and I was wrong.
My windows media, winamp, etc using friends and my iTunes using friends all had little trouble picking up Amarok, but they sure did have trouble picking up each others' software. Amarok has its flaws, but its usability is pretty damn undeniable.
The fact that Apple seemingly painlessly supported multiple generations of ATI, Intel, and NVidia gpus is an interesting testament to the use of well implemented OpenGL.
From what I've heard from those developing Linux GPU drivers and window managers (especially one or two compiz-fusion devs), X's DRI and DRM aren't enough to make full use of OpenGL capability (which is why the NVidia X drivers override a lot of X functionality).
It's not an impossible problem to solve, but it's a category in which we can grow, for sure.
Heh - got me man. I don't even use it on my dual core:-)
But if the rumor (confirmed? Not a rumor?) that Intel's planning on cranking out massively multicore cpus that can be used for raytracing in place of a gpu turns out to be true we could be seeing this kind of hardware in desktops pretty fast.
Right, but what about when you need 1024 cores? 16 boxes with 64 cores each, or does it make more sense to get four 256 core boxes? Extrapolate to 4096, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
The cypher was too simple to be that indicative of talent. They're obviously just testing how many people have very basic knowledge of this stuff.
Oh I don't think there's anything new about this. I'm just saying if your average student doesn't think geometry or algebra is relevant they definitely won't get the point of a turing machine or the like.
Four years teaching algebra? In my school system they taught pre algebra in 7th grade (which could be considered part of algebra), algebra in 8th grade, and after that it was geometry, trig, pre-calc, and calc. That means 1 (2 if you count pre-alg) year of algebra.
And I grew up in Idaho, for heaven's sake. We're not the math capital of the world by any means.
In junior high many kids think algebra and geometry are irrelevant to life, and things they'll never use. There's no way they'd see Turing machines, state machines, regular expressions, etc as remotely relevant. They wouldn't be motivated enough to really tackle it, even if they are plenty capable mentally.
Right. I wish I could agree with that. I got a macbook pro. The power adapter was defective when it came, and Apple happily replaced that. I was glad. Then I left it alone at a friend's house, and they had a family with a toddler come visit. She ripped my left shift key off and rendered it useless. No idea how, I wasn't there. But here's the kicker:
Apple won't replace it without replacing the entire keyboard for $283. I called customer service 5 times hoping to get a sane representative that would just send me the key so I could put it on myself. Each time I ended up visiting their supervisors, and their answer was "sorry, you have to send your machine in and get the keyboard replaced for $283."
None of them could just send me a darn shift key. I just want the key, I can do the rest myself. With any other vendor, replacing my shift key would have been simple. Hell I can get a cheap laptop for $283.
I'm torn. I really enjoy my Apple (even though I use Linux on it), but with this kind of customer service I think I'd be better with a generic PC.
That assumes they take the same path we did towards tools and technology. I'd think a successful path towards technology would be very different under water since there are huge differences in so very many environmental conditions. Many of them would make it harder to do things we do on land, but many would make it easier to do things we couldn't on land.
Every Linux machine I've used since 2004 has filled all but about %5 of my ram with precache.
Linux DOES precache. LOTS.
Nothing leads to success like listening to the customer and selling them the product that they want.
Offering no choice is what got them where they are, so...
I did some freelance for a game development firm, and deleting an 800 mb folder and copying it off a flash drive required about half an hour on a quad core system with 4 gigs of ram with a 500 gig Sata2 hard drive(under Vista). I was stunned such basic functionality was so severely defective compared to much older machines running XP.
Vista doesn't do everything wrong, it's not that bad - but it does do enough things terribly, terribly wrong that I just prefer XP if I have to use Windows.
I love the fact that this was modded informative.
You're going so far as to dual boot your machine, why the hell just not boot into Windows??
Why would I? It has nothing I need. All my favorite development tools are on Linux, and the few games I occasionally play run fine in wine.
I kept OSX around because it came with the machine and seems like a waste to delete it, but I don't really use it very often.
This makes plenty of sense. I've personally dealt with several IBM BlueGene supercomputers (more than 200,000 cores) that didn't perform near this well.
The GPUs definitely made a huge difference in this case.
Name one game that runs well with WINE or Crossover on Linux that doesn't run under WINE or Crossover on OS X. Name one commercial game available for Linux but not OS X.
Actually running Ragnarok Online (to name just one example), especially with private servers, is nigh impossible on OSX but pretty easy in Linux, and there are quite a few more. OSX's wine doesn't support OpenGL without compiling tons of external things (and lots of upgrades to Quartz et al), and even then it isn't detected correctly by many programs without yet more hideous modifications.
I can't name any more examples because I gave up after trying that game and would just boot into Linux if I needed to use Wine for anything that needed sound or 3D.
This is one thing, but that's a whole nother thing.
That doesn't mean it doesn't eat your soul little by little, day by day. It watches, and waits.
I'm not sure why you'd think going to Apple would be any better. You get the exact same business tactics, just a slightly more stylish computer.
This is an absolutely true statement, but it overlooks one thing: the unfair advantage that is monopoly status and industry entrenchment.
I support open source because it's hard to leverage unfairly, but when I have to choose between Microsoft and Apple I choose Apple because they're the underdog.
When Microsoft's market share reaches 50% or less on desktop OSes and browsers, I'll re-evaluate my stance. They have the same business practices as Apple, but they have far more power until the ecosystem evens out, so they are capable of much more abuse.
Well, he didn't say it was a small garage.
Well there's an easy win to set precedent...
Take one for the team, Sony!
Pony porn? What is wrong with you?!?
I agree scripting is a really powerful thing, but I think it's important people don't view GUI and scripting as a dichotomy.
Linux is critiqued often on how often people use scripting instead of the GUI, and OSX is critiqued often on how often ease of use (GUI functionality) is sacrificed at the expense of power (scriptability).
Both are just misconceptions most of the time. Many Linux scripts can be replaced with sequences of GUI clicks, and many "inaccessible" things in OSX can be solved with scripting (showing hidden files in finder...). It's time people concede that both are useful. I mean, if we're saying iTunes has feature X because all you have to do is execute a few scripts in we should probably concede GUIs aren't the end all, or if they are then perhaps even Apple hasn't solved the problem completely.
I'm a proud Linux and Apple user. Since I know how to program and script I tend to prefer Linux, which is perhaps a reason I tend to prefer Linux apps, but I think each has its place (in a purely GUI sense) depending on audience.
I have introduced plenty of mostly-Windows newbies to OSX, Gnome, and KDE, and in general their affinity has been even over the 3. Almost all said something along the lines of "I'm used to Windows, but after I take a second, I get this."
How many times has an attractive woman looked at the customized UI for your software and thought "Wow. There's a guy I'd like to get it on with".
That's the first criteria on which I choose my software: how many women will dig me.
Nope. I want Amarok. I want last.fm capability. I want the use of my library, but not to be restricted to it. I want the lyrics and artist info from wikipedia it gives me.
I want the option of using my music player like I used to use Winamp or like many use iTunes, depending on my mood.
So far Amarok has been the only player that has managed to do all the above without frustrating the shit out of me. I didn't think I'd ever find the best of both worlds, and I was wrong.
My windows media, winamp, etc using friends and my iTunes using friends all had little trouble picking up Amarok, but they sure did have trouble picking up each others' software. Amarok has its flaws, but its usability is pretty damn undeniable.
The fact that Apple seemingly painlessly supported multiple generations of ATI, Intel, and NVidia gpus is an interesting testament to the use of well implemented OpenGL.
From what I've heard from those developing Linux GPU drivers and window managers (especially one or two compiz-fusion devs), X's DRI and DRM aren't enough to make full use of OpenGL capability (which is why the NVidia X drivers override a lot of X functionality).
It's not an impossible problem to solve, but it's a category in which we can grow, for sure.
Heh - got me man. I don't even use it on my dual core :-)
But if the rumor (confirmed? Not a rumor?) that Intel's planning on cranking out massively multicore cpus that can be used for raytracing in place of a gpu turns out to be true we could be seeing this kind of hardware in desktops pretty fast.
Right, but what about when you need 1024 cores? 16 boxes with 64 cores each, or does it make more sense to get four 256 core boxes? Extrapolate to 4096, etc.
Don't worry. That's when Windows 8 will come out.
All aboard the treadmill!