The Revolution has that feature, too (scroll one increment at a time versus a smoothly spinning scroll wheel, if I understand you). But I'm talking about the "tilt wheel", where you can use it to scroll left and right, in addition to up and down. I don't like tilt wheels, because they make it slightly harder to perform a middle click. This matters more on Unix than on Windows, because middle clicking is more common on Unix.
In fact, if I could find this mouse without the tilt wheel, I'd be really tempted to buy another to replace my current VX. I could bind other buttons to do horizontal scrolling, if I wanted it.
Actually, I don't like this feature. The fact that Logitech mouse wheels "tilt" means you need to take care when clicking to ensure it goes straight down. I'm used to it, but simpler mice are more ergonomic in this sense. I would rather bind "horizontal scroll" to some other button or not use it at all...
I have the Logitech VX Revolution (not the same as the nano), and I love it. The battery (AA) lasts a month or more. Occasionally my mouse gets confused (or something) and moves more slowly than it should, but turning it off/on or changing the battery always fixes it. It has seven buttons besides the standard right,left,middle,scroll-up,scroll-down. (I'm counting some of them multiple times, because they can be pushed in multiple directions.)
This is a laser mouse, so it pretty much works on any surface.
As for the supposedly huge performance improvement of 18% (that's all?!), I have regularly hand-optimised code that ran more than twice as fast.
True. I've read that a hand optimization of less than 50% sometimes isn't worth a developer's time, because users won't really notice it. (Obviously that doesn't apply to situations were a ton of small optimizations are needed, and the application will speed up over time.)
if you take the thinking out of a process and let a process/machine/program do all the thinking, your mind will inevitably get lazy and your work will suffer over time
I think that it could very well free your mind to think about better things. Build systems are a good example. If I had to manually compile each translation unit, I couldn't spend as much time thinking about the code.
I love how this guy discovers the obvious and then gets people to buy his books.
Well, his talent is that he can talk. His ideas aren't "obvious"; in fact, I sometimes doubt that he is correct. His books don't employ the level of rigor that Freakonomics, for example, uses. But he has interesting ideas and explains them well. That's why his books are best sellers.
JFS has treated me very well for the last 2 years or so. It's fast when dealing with small files, unlike XFS. I've never noticed corrupted files after a hard boot, so I prefer it to EXT3. JFS also feels faster... of course, my perception isn't a benchmark.
I would love to see the next generation of filesystems catch on, though. I would really like my data to be automatically checksummed on my file server.
except it proved the opposite. Being ripped and overweight with muscle makes you live longer.
That's just the problem--it didn't show anything about being extremely "heavy" and having a low BF%. You are conjecturing that such people skewed the results. The study controlled for activity level, so I'm not sure that skewing occurred. (The least skewed part of the results should be the part that applies to inactive people, because body builders will not be part of this group.)
Or drop BMI entirely, it is worth than worthless. It's misleading.
That's not so. BMI combined with body fat percentage yields useful information. A study like this could show, for instance, that it's not healthy to be completely ripped / covered in muscle, or that a certain total amount of body fat is optimally healthy (obviously adjusting for height, etc.).
You misunderstood the parent. His point was that just as google can't use AP's content for free, this newspaper shouldn't be able to use this girl's writing for free.
But I certainly think the guy done wrong (if he did the act that's alleged).
Wrong? Probably. At least very creepy. A criminal or civil offense? Probably not.
Hmm... I was assuming (perhaps incorrectly) that he had distributed the photos (maybe posting them online or e-mailing them). Even unwittingly allowing the photos to slip out of his hands is potentially damaging to the subjects. But if he did note of that, I don't really care what he does with photoshop in his basement.
I don't know the details. I know that reporters are exempt, and I know that photos when a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy are a no-no, but I don't know about anything in between.
[T]he fact that you need a model release for it is a red herring, as is your statement "Publishing an image of my face on someone else's naked body certainly seems like exploitation to me."
Maybe. I'm not a lawyer, and I was merely commenting on my American English interpretation of the word "exploitation". I don't really know the legal meaning.
Perhaps this is merely defamation of character, and the suit should be civil, rather than criminal. But I certainly think the guy done wrong (if he did the act that's alleged).
It's not child porn, but I think the article said "exploitation of a minor". This makes sense... it's kind of like slander, I think. A photographer can't publish your photo without your written consent. How much worse is this? Publishing an image of my face on someone else's naked body certainly seems like exploitation to me.
Eh I don't know if you can really blame them. If they can successfully sue then it's entirely the law's fault (or the judge for badly interpreting it)... Anyone can bring a case, no matter how outlandish.
I can't agree with that. If someone engages in frivolous lawsuits, that's a reflection on their principles. Just because it's legal, doesn't mean it's an appropriate thing to do. There are plenty of ways I can be a jerk without breaking the law, but I'm still a jerk.
...if you halt progress to fix some code that works reliably for the sake of cleanliness, you can quickly get bogged down in word-smithing that adds little value.
I agree--this happened to me, in fact, when I wrote a minor feature for an open source project. Several times there was always a reply to my patch saying, "you should fix this", or "yeah, but it would be nice if you did this, too..." It was kind of disheartening... but I still like code reviews, in general.
how many defects are discovered in the review versus how many make it out the door?
I don't think defects are the only metric. Code reviews can result in a cleaner codebase that's easier to understand. Everyone occasionally writes bad code. A reviewer might say, "I see that it works, but I don't like it..." and mention an alternative solution. A reviewer might suggest that something is non-obvious and that a comment is warranted. Code reviews aren't just for bugs, they are to get better code.
Well, my last workplace had code reviews for everything, and I found them tremendously helpful. They accomplish a few things:
catch basic errors (second set of eyes)
get new people up to speed (e.g., a more experienced dev says "actually, we have a library that would help here..."). Also, reviews can help an inexperienced engineer become a better developer.
keep employees abreast of new development (at least two people know about every commit in detail)
Furthermore, if I edit code that was written by (or is owned by) Bill, I'll ask him to review it so he'll know about the new feature I added (which is good, if he ends up having to support it).
I'm not saying I don't believe it (I'm not sure), but another point for thought is that it should have reached terminal velocity, right? I don't think a pea-sized rock falls fast enough to leave a crater the size of a foot and cause a loud bang.
On the other hand, I don't blame him for an inaccurate accounting of events--most of what we "remember" is actually reconstructions from logic.
The next three films are likely to be sequels? The article doesn't even make that claim. The person who wrote the summary likely thinks tha Pixar just "pops out" these films. In fact, they usually take about 4 years.
Slashdot Mirror
The Revolution has that feature, too (scroll one increment at a time versus a smoothly spinning scroll wheel, if I understand you). But I'm talking about the "tilt wheel", where you can use it to scroll left and right, in addition to up and down. I don't like tilt wheels, because they make it slightly harder to perform a middle click. This matters more on Unix than on Windows, because middle clicking is more common on Unix.
In fact, if I could find this mouse without the tilt wheel, I'd be really tempted to buy another to replace my current VX. I could bind other buttons to do horizontal scrolling, if I wanted it.
Actually, I don't like this feature. The fact that Logitech mouse wheels "tilt" means you need to take care when clicking to ensure it goes straight down. I'm used to it, but simpler mice are more ergonomic in this sense. I would rather bind "horizontal scroll" to some other button or not use it at all...
I have the Logitech VX Revolution (not the same as the nano), and I love it. The battery (AA) lasts a month or more. Occasionally my mouse gets confused (or something) and moves more slowly than it should, but turning it off/on or changing the battery always fixes it. It has seven buttons besides the standard right,left,middle,scroll-up,scroll-down. (I'm counting some of them multiple times, because they can be pushed in multiple directions.)
This is a laser mouse, so it pretty much works on any surface.
As for the supposedly huge performance improvement of 18% (that's all?!), I have regularly hand-optimised code that ran more than twice as fast.
True. I've read that a hand optimization of less than 50% sometimes isn't worth a developer's time, because users won't really notice it. (Obviously that doesn't apply to situations were a ton of small optimizations are needed, and the application will speed up over time.)
if you take the thinking out of a process and let a process/machine/program do all the thinking, your mind will inevitably get lazy and your work will suffer over time
I think that it could very well free your mind to think about better things. Build systems are a good example. If I had to manually compile each translation unit, I couldn't spend as much time thinking about the code.
when a mac truck disagree's with him, he will claim it was in the bike lane.
Hmm... no, I don't think he'll be claiming much of anything.
Oh, I should add that he makes his readers feel smart... I would guess that's actually the reason he is so successful.
I love how this guy discovers the obvious and then gets people to buy his books.
Well, his talent is that he can talk. His ideas aren't "obvious"; in fact, I sometimes doubt that he is correct. His books don't employ the level of rigor that Freakonomics, for example, uses. But he has interesting ideas and explains them well. That's why his books are best sellers.
JFS has treated me very well for the last 2 years or so. It's fast when dealing with small files, unlike XFS. I've never noticed corrupted files after a hard boot, so I prefer it to EXT3. JFS also feels faster... of course, my perception isn't a benchmark.
I would love to see the next generation of filesystems catch on, though. I would really like my data to be automatically checksummed on my file server.
except it proved the opposite. Being ripped and overweight with muscle makes you live longer.
That's just the problem--it didn't show anything about being extremely "heavy" and having a low BF%. You are conjecturing that such people skewed the results. The study controlled for activity level, so I'm not sure that skewing occurred. (The least skewed part of the results should be the part that applies to inactive people, because body builders will not be part of this group.)
Or drop BMI entirely, it is worth than worthless. It's misleading.
That's not so. BMI combined with body fat percentage yields useful information. A study like this could show, for instance, that it's not healthy to be completely ripped / covered in muscle, or that a certain total amount of body fat is optimally healthy (obviously adjusting for height, etc.).
I wish they had analyzed body fat percentage, in addition to BMI. The two numbers together could yield much more specific information.
You misunderstood the parent. His point was that just as google can't use AP's content for free, this newspaper shouldn't be able to use this girl's writing for free.
about the only time they cannot is when you are clearly the subject of the image AND it is for commercial promotion.
Thanks for clearing that up. I didn't know the circumstances.
But I certainly think the guy done wrong (if he did the act that's alleged).
Wrong? Probably. At least very creepy. A criminal or civil offense? Probably not.
Hmm... I was assuming (perhaps incorrectly) that he had distributed the photos (maybe posting them online or e-mailing them). Even unwittingly allowing the photos to slip out of his hands is potentially damaging to the subjects. But if he did note of that, I don't really care what he does with photoshop in his basement.
I don't know the details. I know that reporters are exempt, and I know that photos when a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy are a no-no, but I don't know about anything in between.
[T]he fact that you need a model release for it is a red herring, as is your statement "Publishing an image of my face on someone else's naked body certainly seems like exploitation to me."
Maybe. I'm not a lawyer, and I was merely commenting on my American English interpretation of the word "exploitation". I don't really know the legal meaning.
Perhaps this is merely defamation of character, and the suit should be civil, rather than criminal. But I certainly think the guy done wrong (if he did the act that's alleged).
It's not child porn, but I think the article said "exploitation of a minor". This makes sense... it's kind of like slander, I think. A photographer can't publish your photo without your written consent. How much worse is this? Publishing an image of my face on someone else's naked body certainly seems like exploitation to me.
Eh I don't know if you can really blame them. If they can successfully sue then it's entirely the law's fault (or the judge for badly interpreting it)... Anyone can bring a case, no matter how outlandish.
I can't agree with that. If someone engages in frivolous lawsuits, that's a reflection on their principles. Just because it's legal, doesn't mean it's an appropriate thing to do. There are plenty of ways I can be a jerk without breaking the law, but I'm still a jerk.
...if you halt progress to fix some code that works reliably for the sake of cleanliness, you can quickly get bogged down in word-smithing that adds little value.
I agree--this happened to me, in fact, when I wrote a minor feature for an open source project. Several times there was always a reply to my patch saying, "you should fix this", or "yeah, but it would be nice if you did this, too..." It was kind of disheartening... but I still like code reviews, in general.
how many defects are discovered in the review versus how many make it out the door?
I don't think defects are the only metric. Code reviews can result in a cleaner codebase that's easier to understand. Everyone occasionally writes bad code. A reviewer might say, "I see that it works, but I don't like it..." and mention an alternative solution. A reviewer might suggest that something is non-obvious and that a comment is warranted. Code reviews aren't just for bugs, they are to get better code.
Well, my last workplace had code reviews for everything, and I found them tremendously helpful. They accomplish a few things:
Furthermore, if I edit code that was written by (or is owned by) Bill, I'll ask him to review it so he'll know about the new feature I added (which is good, if he ends up having to support it).
I'm not saying I don't believe it (I'm not sure), but another point for thought is that it should have reached terminal velocity, right? I don't think a pea-sized rock falls fast enough to leave a crater the size of a foot and cause a loud bang.
On the other hand, I don't blame him for an inaccurate accounting of events--most of what we "remember" is actually reconstructions from logic.
Now if John Lasseter leaves, then we might be able to talk about Pixar going downhill.
And that's not even a sure thing, considering how much he cares about mentoring younger directors.
The next three films are likely to be sequels? The article doesn't even make that claim. The person who wrote the summary likely thinks tha Pixar just "pops out" these films. In fact, they usually take about 4 years.