With memcpy it is *precisely* known how much data will be copied. It is right there, 3rd parameter. If a developer can't do "if (sizetocopy = sizeofdstbuffer)", it is just as unlikely that he will be able to properly state that additional parameter that specifies the destination buffer size.
Why not make a version of strcpy and memcpy that does its own sizeof(dst)? Leave the size parameter in there for cases where you want to copy less than the max size of the destination, but ignore the programmer when they give a size value that's larger than the actual sizeof(dst)...
So you dislike the TOS movies, TNG, TNG movies, DS9, Voyager, Enterprise, learning Klingon, and are ashamed of Trekkers, yet you are still a Trekkie? I'd say your just some guy with an affection for a show from your youth.
The (not low end) thinkpad I got a few months ago had the camera as an option. A brief look at other brands would probably reveal the same thing. Hell, you could just ask the other people working there what they use.
If you love apple too much to lower youself to using a wintel machine, why not get an old mac? The recent macbooks/ibooks may be camera-free. I know that the Pismo (powerbook g3 400/500) series is great, and can run OSX10.4 (haven't tried 10.5, sorry).
Well put. The shift of young professionals away form science / engineering, towards law, finance, etc. concerns me more than most other long-term problems on this continent. The benefits from the surge in sci/eng grads during the Apollo program continue to this day; it's probably safe to say that the talent raised during the 60s is a key pillar in the US victory during the Cold War, and US supremacy during the 1990s.
On fusion, the Energy Crisis is really an Engineering Crisis - once fusion is ready to go commercial, _all_ of the problems in our current setup will be gone. No more need to support tin-pot dictatorships, fully domestic fuel supply, no long-term waste storage problems, no meltdown risk, no more smog, drastically reduced point-source CO2 emissions; heck, even those electric cars we're starting to build will ultimately be powered by a clean source. Indeed, the only problem will be the cost of replacing all the existing power plants; but that investment should be an easy case to make: huge long-term return on investment coupled with significant short-term economic benefits from construction.
There was no "fuck the safety" attitude for the Apollo program - look at what happened after the Apollo 1 disaster. That disaster saw three people die on the ground when an oxygen fire in their command module started. The reaction: a grounding of the program, and a complete redesign of the module.
The US has never lost a person in space, and if you think about the dangers of space flight, you'll understand that that's only because they've always put an emphasis on safety.
I've heard that the estimated budget was $100 million. So they've made $80 million over that... so what is the problem exactly?
Opportunity cost. $100m invested in The Watchmen can't be invested elsewhere, and if $100m invested in another movie would have given higher profits, then they didn't make as much money as they could have.
I think the important thing is the fact that something will actually be done on this file. The idea of high-speed rail in the US is about as novel as posting flamebait to slashdot.
The author didn't say that facebook causes lower grades, they said facebook users have lower grades.
Read the following (from the summary!) closely:
'I'm just saying that there's some kind of relationship there, and there's many third variables that need to be studied.' One hypothesis is that students who spend more time enjoying themselves rather than studying might tend to latch onto the nearest distraction, such as Facebook or that students who use the social networking site might also spend more time on other non-studying activities such as sports or music. 'It may be that if it wasn't for Facebook, some students would still find other ways to avoid studying, and would still get lower grades. But perhaps the lower GPAs could actually be because students are spending too much time socializing online.'
It's quite reasonable to expect to be able to fix something you bought.
If the only way to do that is to have the source code, then the source should be available. In this scenario, it's reasonable to allow the software company to charge for a copy of the source and to continue to hold copyright over it. If you include patents, the companies would a) not lose money, b) not lose control of the source code, and c) not lose control over their original ideas.
In fact, with copyright intact, I don't think they could claim to lose any property in the transaction; the only downside to them would be the loss of unpatented trade-secret bits of the source. But even then, they could split off the trade-secreted bits and continue to support them, if the trade secrets really held any value for them as secrets, or they could simply patent the ideas.
Patents may not be palatable, but I would think that simply means there's room for negotiation between the free-software and closed-source camps - patent concessions on one side, and source-code openness concessions on the other.
Insurrection was cheesy; the premise was a stretch, but the characters stayed intact and it had some redeeming moments. All in all it was no worse than any other odd-numbered trek movie. It may have left people cracking wise and pointing out ironies, but there was nothing positively bad about it.
Nemesis, on the other hand, was shit. It felt like the people who made it hated the fact they had to make it; there was no joy, no fun, no invention... it was all darkness and slime-green lighting, disgusting enemies, vile, stupid-looking enemy ships (unlike, say, the cool-looking Bird of Prey or Warbird), and a plot so uninspired you groan when you find out what's going on. It made you feel empty just for watching it. It destroyed the franchise so completely one wonders if the writers and actors wanted that to happen.
Compare this to, say, the recent X-Files movie: not great, but it kept the spirit of the series alive and left open the door for a better sequel.
And if there were only some way of contriving that a state or an army should be made up of lovers and their loves, they would be the very best governors of their own city, abstaining from all dishonour, and emulating one another in honour; and when fighting at each other's side, although a mere handful, they would overcome the world. For what lover would not choose rather to be seen by all mankind than by his beloved, either when abandoning his post or throwing away his arms? He would be ready to die a thousand deaths rather than endure this. Or who would desert his beloved or fail him in the hour of danger? The veriest coward would become an inspired hero, equal to the bravest, at such a time; Love would inspire him. That courage which, as Homer says, the god breathes into the souls of some heroes, Love of his own nature infuses into the lover.
Exactly when or where has the UN has been instrumental in making the world stable independently of the United States?
In several cases, though I can't see a reason to limit the list to cases where it acted without the help of the US, unless you're trying to place the US outside of the world.
But for a few cases where the UN helped?
Suez, Cyprus, or for a modern flavour, Kosovo. There's East Timor, too. They may not have quickly stopped the chaos after the end of the Soviet Union (Somalia, Yugoslavia, Iraq) or the many ongoing conflicts (Ireland, Sri Lanka, Israel - Palestine), but they have always acted as a force for good. In each of those conflicts, international diplomacy happened at the UN, and the institution acted exactly as it should have: as a place for all parties to talk, and as a vehicle for the powers of the world to direct their actions to bring about peace.
The lack of a major war? I guess that depends what you mean by a major war. Let's consider the Second Congo War in the former country of Zaire that ended up killing 5.4 million people and displaced millions more. It started in 1998 and was supposed to end in 2003, but fighting still continues. Yeah, the UN has been REAL effective in preventing and defusing conflicts.
I see this point. You are right that the war in the DRC _is_ a major war. And the parties to it have been states - the reason why it was called 'Africa's World War'. This is exactly the sort of conflict the UN was made to solve. The UN failed because those states with the power to stop the wars could not be convinced by those states that wanted to see the wars. But, even in failure, it remains true that the UN has been a place for the parties to the war and the other countries to talk, when they wanted to.
In short, the failure of the UN to end some wars is not a reason to ignore the effectiveness of the UN in helping international diplomacy, including both bringing about the end of other wars and securing continued peace.
This is exactly why the UN was founded. The UN exists to protect the post-world war 2 order. It comes out of the direct experience people had before and during world war 2. It is one of the pillars of defense against future wars between states.
The UN is the only place where all the world's countries have diplomats in the same place. It fosters dialoge and discourages conflict. It is the first and best place to diffuse tensions between countries quickly, and is the best place - truly neutral ground - for opposing countries to talk and avoid fights. Can you think of a more effective way to avoid inter-state wars than to encourage dialogue? Because our leaders who lived thorugh and fought ww2 could not. Given that we haven't had a major war since then, they continue to have more experience than us in these matters.
There are some things to criticize about the UN, but calling for an end to the UN because it does nothing for us is analogous to calling for an end to fire departments because all they've ever done is put out other people's fires.
A PHB fills a room with couches and cheap avant-guard office furniture, and it's the end of computer labs? Computer labs will stay with us, for the simple reasons that there will aways be students unable to afford laptops, and computers are required to complete coursework these days. Not to mention the convenience being able to check email or print stuff without having to lug around a laptop all the time.
AFAIK, all Enterprises use a proprietary and closed-source OS. With enemies like the Romulans, the Federation will take any kind of security it can get - even security thorough obscurity.
Yes, because a first past the post system for electing a national president is a brilliant little bit of political legislation.
In contrast to the sublime wisdom which created the Italian parliamentary system. Who needs a FPTP system that's worked for a millennium in the UK when there's a superficially more equal PR method?
Generally speaking, they are. The most notable exception as far as I know are Toshiba machines and perhaps thinkpads, which would cost as much as Apples anyway.
While there's clearly a markup associated with the Apple brand, there's also clearly a relationship between higher price and higher quality. The Apple logo, then, is a case of a trademark working as it should.
Legitimate problems with Apple pricing do exist - adding $100 for a black case, for example, or charging far too much for OEM-installed RAM. But in terms of the machines themselves, the assertion of fashion-driven overpricing has little basis in reality.
No, they still press them because there's a market of dinosaurs still sold on the idea that "digital" necessarily means bad quality.
You're right, of course, but I also like vinyl for other reasons. One, they're a tangible format, which rightly or wrongly seems more permanent than digital formats.
Two, if you look closely enough you can actually see the groves that make the music, and you can McGyver a record player pretty quick should the need ever arise (it won't). Unlike tapes or CDs whose storage format falls close to the tech magic end of the spectrum (for most people), and which require mfg'd equipment in order to be played.
In short, from an irrational, survivalist, 'what if civilization collapsed' point of view, vinyl is clearly the superior format.
I have never considered asian porn to be a global threat, I just not a fan.
Not everyone sees the problem as being so benign. Apparently you didn't hear about the high-level petition to halt Japan's weirdo porn industry. Anything that makes millions puke has got to be a threat.
Slashdot Mirror
With memcpy it is *precisely* known how much data will be copied. It is right there, 3rd parameter. If a developer can't do "if (sizetocopy = sizeofdstbuffer)", it is just as unlikely that he will be able to properly state that additional parameter that specifies the destination buffer size.
Why not make a version of strcpy and memcpy that does its own sizeof(dst)? Leave the size parameter in there for cases where you want to copy less than the max size of the destination, but ignore the programmer when they give a size value that's larger than the actual sizeof(dst)...
So you dislike the TOS movies, TNG, TNG movies, DS9, Voyager, Enterprise, learning Klingon, and are ashamed of Trekkers, yet you are still a Trekkie? I'd say your just some guy with an affection for a show from your youth.
The (not low end) thinkpad I got a few months ago had the camera as an option. A brief look at other brands would probably reveal the same thing. Hell, you could just ask the other people working there what they use.
If you love apple too much to lower youself to using a wintel machine, why not get an old mac? The recent macbooks/ibooks may be camera-free. I know that the Pismo (powerbook g3 400/500) series is great, and can run OSX10.4 (haven't tried 10.5, sorry).
To all the physicists out there: what are the theoretical limits to holographic storage? Could you use, say, a 1m x 1m cube to store a few yottabytes?
Well put. The shift of young professionals away form science / engineering, towards law, finance, etc. concerns me more than most other long-term problems on this continent. The benefits from the surge in sci/eng grads during the Apollo program continue to this day; it's probably safe to say that the talent raised during the 60s is a key pillar in the US victory during the Cold War, and US supremacy during the 1990s.
On fusion, the Energy Crisis is really an Engineering Crisis - once fusion is ready to go commercial, _all_ of the problems in our current setup will be gone. No more need to support tin-pot dictatorships, fully domestic fuel supply, no long-term waste storage problems, no meltdown risk, no more smog, drastically reduced point-source CO2 emissions; heck, even those electric cars we're starting to build will ultimately be powered by a clean source. Indeed, the only problem will be the cost of replacing all the existing power plants; but that investment should be an easy case to make: huge long-term return on investment coupled with significant short-term economic benefits from construction.
There was no "fuck the safety" attitude for the Apollo program - look at what happened after the Apollo 1 disaster. That disaster saw three people die on the ground when an oxygen fire in their command module started. The reaction: a grounding of the program, and a complete redesign of the module.
The US has never lost a person in space, and if you think about the dangers of space flight, you'll understand that that's only because they've always put an emphasis on safety.
I've heard that the estimated budget was $100 million. So they've made $80 million over that ... so what is the problem exactly?
Opportunity cost. $100m invested in The Watchmen can't be invested elsewhere, and if $100m invested in another movie would have given higher profits, then they didn't make as much money as they could have.
Perhaps we've finally stumbled upon a use for the ISS - the commercial production of space raspberries for the earth market.
Not only would they be space-agedly tasty, they could be exported fresh, even in winter
I think the important thing is the fact that something will actually be done on this file. The idea of high-speed rail in the US is about as novel as posting flamebait to slashdot.
Yes: http://news.cnet.com/2300-11386_3-10000718-7.html?tag=mncol
I can imagine this device looking like a magic number to engineers 9,000 years from now as they try to figure out how the thing works.
Seriously.
I'd expect that sort of thing from Tosser's School of Art and Wankery, but not MIT.
Not to mention the fact that their experiment was done for the greater part of a century, with film-based cameras.
The author didn't say that facebook causes lower grades, they said facebook users have lower grades.
Read the following (from the summary!) closely:
'I'm just saying that there's some kind of relationship there, and there's many third variables that need to be studied.' One hypothesis is that students who spend more time enjoying themselves rather than studying might tend to latch onto the nearest distraction, such as Facebook or that students who use the social networking site might also spend more time on other non-studying activities such as sports or music. 'It may be that if it wasn't for Facebook, some students would still find other ways to avoid studying, and would still get lower grades. But perhaps the lower GPAs could actually be because students are spending too much time socializing online.'
It's quite reasonable to expect to be able to fix something you bought.
If the only way to do that is to have the source code, then the source should be available. In this scenario, it's reasonable to allow the software company to charge for a copy of the source and to continue to hold copyright over it. If you include patents, the companies would a) not lose money, b) not lose control of the source code, and c) not lose control over their original ideas.
In fact, with copyright intact, I don't think they could claim to lose any property in the transaction; the only downside to them would be the loss of unpatented trade-secret bits of the source. But even then, they could split off the trade-secreted bits and continue to support them, if the trade secrets really held any value for them as secrets, or they could simply patent the ideas.
Patents may not be palatable, but I would think that simply means there's room for negotiation between the free-software and closed-source camps - patent concessions on one side, and source-code openness concessions on the other.
Insurrection was cheesy; the premise was a stretch, but the characters stayed intact and it had some redeeming moments. All in all it was no worse than any other odd-numbered trek movie. It may have left people cracking wise and pointing out ironies, but there was nothing positively bad about it.
Nemesis, on the other hand, was shit. It felt like the people who made it hated the fact they had to make it; there was no joy, no fun, no invention... it was all darkness and slime-green lighting, disgusting enemies, vile, stupid-looking enemy ships (unlike, say, the cool-looking Bird of Prey or Warbird), and a plot so uninspired you groan when you find out what's going on. It made you feel empty just for watching it. It destroyed the franchise so completely one wonders if the writers and actors wanted that to happen.
Compare this to, say, the recent X-Files movie: not great, but it kept the spirit of the series alive and left open the door for a better sequel.
And if there were only some way of contriving that a state or an army should be made up of lovers and their loves, they would be the very best governors of their own city, abstaining from all dishonour, and emulating one another in honour; and when fighting at each other's side, although a mere handful, they would overcome the world. For what lover would not choose rather to be seen by all mankind than by his beloved, either when abandoning his post or throwing away his arms? He would be ready to die a thousand deaths rather than endure this. Or who would desert his beloved or fail him in the hour of danger? The veriest coward would become an inspired hero, equal to the bravest, at such a time; Love would inspire him. That courage which, as Homer says, the god breathes into the souls of some heroes, Love of his own nature infuses into the lover.
Apollodorus, in The Symposium by Plato.
Gotta love those Greeks
The UN failed because those states with the power to stop the wars could not be convinced by those states that wanted to see the wars
should read
The UN failed because those states with the power to stop the wars could not be convinced by those states that wanted to stop the wars
Exactly when or where has the UN has been instrumental in making the world stable independently of the United States?
In several cases, though I can't see a reason to limit the list to cases where it acted without the help of the US, unless you're trying to place the US outside of the world.
But for a few cases where the UN helped?
Suez, Cyprus, or for a modern flavour, Kosovo. There's East Timor, too. They may not have quickly stopped the chaos after the end of the Soviet Union (Somalia, Yugoslavia, Iraq) or the many ongoing conflicts (Ireland, Sri Lanka, Israel - Palestine), but they have always acted as a force for good. In each of those conflicts, international diplomacy happened at the UN, and the institution acted exactly as it should have: as a place for all parties to talk, and as a vehicle for the powers of the world to direct their actions to bring about peace.
The lack of a major war? I guess that depends what you mean by a major war. Let's consider the Second Congo War in the former country of Zaire that ended up killing 5.4 million people and displaced millions more. It started in 1998 and was supposed to end in 2003, but fighting still continues. Yeah, the UN has been REAL effective in preventing and defusing conflicts.
I see this point. You are right that the war in the DRC _is_ a major war. And the parties to it have been states - the reason why it was called 'Africa's World War'. This is exactly the sort of conflict the UN was made to solve. The UN failed because those states with the power to stop the wars could not be convinced by those states that wanted to see the wars. But, even in failure, it remains true that the UN has been a place for the parties to the war and the other countries to talk, when they wanted to.
In short, the failure of the UN to end some wars is not a reason to ignore the effectiveness of the UN in helping international diplomacy, including both bringing about the end of other wars and securing continued peace.
The UN helps keep the world stable.
This is exactly why the UN was founded. The UN exists to protect the post-world war 2 order. It comes out of the direct experience people had before and during world war 2. It is one of the pillars of defense against future wars between states.
The UN is the only place where all the world's countries have diplomats in the same place. It fosters dialoge and discourages conflict. It is the first and best place to diffuse tensions between countries quickly, and is the best place - truly neutral ground - for opposing countries to talk and avoid fights. Can you think of a more effective way to avoid inter-state wars than to encourage dialogue? Because our leaders who lived thorugh and fought ww2 could not. Given that we haven't had a major war since then, they continue to have more experience than us in these matters.
There are some things to criticize about the UN, but calling for an end to the UN because it does nothing for us is analogous to calling for an end to fire departments because all they've ever done is put out other people's fires.
A PHB fills a room with couches and cheap avant-guard office furniture, and it's the end of computer labs? Computer labs will stay with us, for the simple reasons that there will aways be students unable to afford laptops, and computers are required to complete coursework these days. Not to mention the convenience being able to check email or print stuff without having to lug around a laptop all the time.
AFAIK, all Enterprises use a proprietary and closed-source OS. With enemies like the Romulans, the Federation will take any kind of security it can get - even security thorough obscurity.
The UK has a FPTP system that's worked for a millennium. The GP's gripe was about FPTP.
Yes, because a first past the post system for electing a national president is a brilliant little bit of political legislation.
In contrast to the sublime wisdom which created the Italian parliamentary system. Who needs a FPTP system that's worked for a millennium in the UK when there's a superficially more equal PR method?
Creak? Are other laptops that flimsy?
Generally speaking, they are. The most notable exception as far as I know are Toshiba machines and perhaps thinkpads, which would cost as much as Apples anyway.
While there's clearly a markup associated with the Apple brand, there's also clearly a relationship between higher price and higher quality. The Apple logo, then, is a case of a trademark working as it should.
Legitimate problems with Apple pricing do exist - adding $100 for a black case, for example, or charging far too much for OEM-installed RAM. But in terms of the machines themselves, the assertion of fashion-driven overpricing has little basis in reality.
No, they still press them because there's a market of dinosaurs still sold on the idea that "digital" necessarily means bad quality.
You're right, of course, but I also like vinyl for other reasons. One, they're a tangible format, which rightly or wrongly seems more permanent than digital formats.
Two, if you look closely enough you can actually see the groves that make the music, and you can McGyver a record player pretty quick should the need ever arise (it won't). Unlike tapes or CDs whose storage format falls close to the tech magic end of the spectrum (for most people), and which require mfg'd equipment in order to be played.
In short, from an irrational, survivalist, 'what if civilization collapsed' point of view, vinyl is clearly the superior format.
I have never considered asian porn to be a global threat, I just not a fan.
Not everyone sees the problem as being so benign. Apparently you didn't hear about the high-level petition to halt Japan's weirdo porn industry. Anything that makes millions puke has got to be a threat.