What'd he say, "so he was trying to do his job comma respectfully and arrested my ass exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point"?
Or was it more, "and then just dump a sh!tload of exclamation points down".
[...] much like ABS and 4-wheel drive, this will probably just backfire and increase death rates.
[citation needed]
Your post would amount to more than fear-mongering if you provided any links to data showing that, for example, anti-lock brakes have resulted in an increase in death rates.
Does the constitutional prohibition of ex post facto laws prevent the legalization of illegal activity as a means to annul the culpability of preexisting perpetrators?
Despite beliefs to the contrary, society is nothing but a giant game of Nomic. There may be rules about what you can do, but if you play well enough you can change those rules. Playing well includes the ability to change them retroactively.
And then we won't have athletes representing countries any more, but drug companies.
"Well, GlaxoSmithKline are looking great, taking home four gold medals, two silvers and five bronzes so far. This is sure to push their stock price up substantially for the coming year."
It's a fun language to learn, because at the core it is *so* simple. In less than a week a good scripter can fully wrap their head around everything that Lua has to offer from the scripting side (not the C++ side; that might be another week). It's rather elegant, really, with convenient syntax for integer-based for-loops that automatically create a new copy of the loop variable on each pass for simple closure creation.
However, when you get down to actually typing in itwell, it's not as verbose as Java, but there's some real RSI danger there. With it's simple core come decisions like "not only will we not give you foo++, we won't even give you foo+=1". Try typing things like "frameCounter = frameCounter + 1" many times and you'll start to scream. Every day I scripted in Lua at work I would long for the times when I could use Ruby to actually get something done.
For those who know JavaScript and want to get a glimpse of what Lua is like, I have a page on my site: Learning Lua from JavaScript.
I'll be interested to see if they go for WoW-style "raw", imperative Lua (gobs of functions) or a more OOP-style Lua (NB: my site).
In designing the Lua interface for an old Game UI authoring product I originally went with OOP-style Lua. It was (IMHO) a rather elegant wrapper on our DOM. However, we soon found that the memory thrash of using Lua's lightweight userdata to go back and forth between C++ and Lua resulted in poor performance on consoles, and I ultimately had to redesign the interface to be more WoW-like for our next release.
It was a shame, putting more onus on the scripter to manage objects (tables of properties in Lua) based on a 'pointer' passed around to uniquely identify each element in the DOM, and passing that pointer to all relevant functions. But the performance increase was dramatic.
The Retina theoretical limit is based on a 'standard' viewing distance for phone displays. If you wanted HD glasses (using a far focal point) you would need much higher res. Did not RTFA, but perhaps that is the sort of target for this.
Speakeasy.net cut me off in 1999 when a Windows server I had at home was exploited (MSSQL Server...grr) and infected. I called them, they explained what was up and how to fix it. I 'fixed' it, called them back, and they put me back online...and then offline again 12 hours later because I hadn't cleaned it all up properly. (My then-girlfriend-now-wire really wanted to play Quake 3 Team Arena...I didn't have time to fight Windows!) I fixed it for real, and they put me right online again.
It was frustrating at the time, but I knew then and I know now that what they did was what I wish more companies did.
What defines HUMAN$? Redefine the variable, the law is still satisfied. We hoomanz do it with brainwashing and conditioning. They're not humans, they're gooks. They don't even believe like we do. It's fine to kill them. Heathens anyway, right? But I'd like to think the robot might be able to work it even more subtly, subverting the law.
Or perhaps the robot will take the laws very seriously, to ill effect.
"About:... We use the term graffiti for our work since we are storing data in a way that non-network participants may regard as unsightly or unwanted vandalism...."
"Update:... It was never our intention to maliciously deface sites,..."
I don't blame them for changing their tune once they came under fire, but I'm surprised that they have both statements on the page at once. Or am I somehow seeing a contradiction where none exists?
How is this not racketeering and extortion? I mean, c'mon... I ask the same questions (not really, but the intent) of the traffic tickets I have gotten here in Colorado. They say "If you mail us a check to make this go away, we'll drop 2 points off of the infraction. In doing so, you are pleading guilty and get rid of varous rights. However, if you choose to challenge this in court, this deal is off the table and we guarantee that all points will be assessed. (Unless you win.)"
I *guess* it's legal to do this. Heck, if it was monetary, I'd even support it as reasonable. ("If you come to court, it costs us $60 to run the trial, and you have to pay that additional fee if you lose. But if you pay in advance you basically get $60 off.") But this bribery with points reductions seems wrong.
In my last case, they even changed it from a speeding ticket to a "defective vehicle" ticket (which my car is definitely not) in order to justify the points drop and (unwritten) to help with car insurance costs.
Bribing citizens to give up their right to go to court, by promising to help protect their record for insurance costs, feels really wrong.
Of course, it would be unrealistic to argue that every, single unauthorized copy is a "lost sale," but arguing the opposite is equally silly.
I object to the use of "lost sale." I would rather see "missed sale." A "loss" is a legal term used for theft. [...] When someone copys a book, what has the author or bookstore or trade association "lost"? They still have all their copies in storage. They still have the copyright. They still have all the money they had before. There is no loss. Nothing is missing.
To bandy words, an "opportunity" is an intangible thing that can almost certainly be agreed upon to exist while at the same time never being a sure thing.
"Dude, that move totally impressed her! She's smiling at you! Go say something witty, this is your opportunity to start a good conversation with an attractive woman!"
"Aw, nevermind...Pat just told her about your goat porn collection."
...
An opportunity can also palpably be lost, or be taken away.
Imagine you operate a store selling clothes that are the latest fashion, heavily in demand. You're selling heavily every day and making massive profit. Now people outside the store somehow manage to convince customers that the fashion is stupid. Nobody wants to buy your goods.
There was no guarantee you were going to sell to as many people today as yesterday, but the opportunity looked good. You still have all your inventory. Nothing has been 'lost'...and yet suddenly you're making a lot less than you were before.
I don't personally believe 99% of what the RIAA says about their profits and piracy and such. Yet I cannot reject an argument that says that piracy reduces some demand. (Not every download is a lost sale, but it slowly adds up.)
I also don't personally know if I believe that the current model of capitalism and 'ownership' makes sense. I'm not saying that I believe that it's necessarily immoral to deprive the RIAA of that revenue. But you can't say that piracy results in "no loss" for the 'legal' purveyors of the booty.
I started reading the article but when I got to this bit I realized they had nothing useful to say:...
You go on to quote what is, itself, a quotation in the article. No less, you only quote a bad looking part of the quotation. No less, it's a quotation by Paul Graham, who I personally believe has said a great many useful things. Were you only just skimming the article?
Is it an undo burden by the school on the student?
What is an "undo" burden? When the school requires the student to remember what the last 10 edits s/he made to the paper were, so on command they can revise it?
"Though not familiar with the project, I'm impressed that the project with by far the most errors (Cardinal), indicating I assume that the least work has been done on it, is still so close to YARV - only 2-4 times slower in a couple tests."
It's easy to run fast when you only account for a very limited subset of functionality. I'd be shocked (am shocked) if preliminary results of something like this *weren't* much faster than the original. I'd take it as a sign that it's not worth it to continue (at least, not if your only purpose for Cardinal was speed).
2-4 times slower is not "so close" in my opinion. 1.5x as long is maybe close.
It's only a very few tests that it's even that close. Ignoring all the numerous error tests, and assuming that the 'too long' tests actually would have completed a millisecond after they were killed, the factors between the YARV and Cardinal results are: 2.2x,
418.2x,
4.7x,
1751.0x,
20.1x,
40.2x,
2420.0x,
2.9x,
1.6x,
6.1x,
3.3x,
3.7x,
94.9x. That's an average factor of 366.8x, or median factor of 6.1x. Even if you throw out the three that are over 100x slower (assuming that they are crazy outliers), That's an average of 18.0x, or median of 4.2x.
I can't tell if this is an indication of how adept the human mind is at seeing patterns where there are none (or seeing what it wants to see), or if it's an indication of how adept it is at throwing out a bunch of random points and 'feeling' the median score.
Ruby is a dynamically typed, strongly typed, runtime-interpretted, very object-oriented programming language. It was created about the same time as Python (10+ years ago?), but is less well-known in the United States as it originated in Japan. It is the langauge that the Ruby on Rails web framework is based on. See the official Ruby website for more information.
And Dish Network's DVR remote comes with explicit "30 second forward" and "10 second back" buttons. I love it. I used to have a Tivo, and I love having this feature built-in.
They barely explain it, as far as I'm concerned. I'd be interested in knowing exactly what sorts of problems they have with Safari's design mode support. Maybe they're already talking directly with Apple; in case they're not, I'd like to know specifics instead of vague claims that ~"stuff doesn't work fully".
"... If you only have analog cable (or OTA) then there's no need for a cable box and TiVo will tune using it's internal tuners -- just as fast as your TV or cable box...."
I'm sure it's faster than the horribly slow speed the OP was describing, but what you've written is not true. My TV's tuner changes channels blazingly fast. Holding down the up-channel button initially changes at about 1 channel per second, and then speeds up to perhaps 3-4 channels per second. And that initial 1 second per channel is an instant change to the channel, followed by 1 second of watching the channel before moving on to the next.
Contrast this with my series 2 Tivo on analog cable. Pressing up channel pauses 1-2 seconds before I can even start seeing the new channel. It's really, really frustrating, coming from high-performance channel surfing.
Slashdot Mirror
What'd he say, "so he was trying to do his job comma respectfully and arrested my ass exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point"?
Or was it more, "and then just dump a sh!tload of exclamation points down".
And some of us are right-minded individuals who get our news from The Daily Show.
[citation needed]
Your post would amount to more than fear-mongering if you provided any links to data showing that, for example, anti-lock brakes have resulted in an increase in death rates.
Despite beliefs to the contrary, society is nothing but a giant game of Nomic. There may be rules about what you can do, but if you play well enough you can change those rules. Playing well includes the ability to change them retroactively.
And then we won't have athletes representing countries any more, but drug companies.
"Well, GlaxoSmithKline are looking great, taking home four gold medals, two silvers and five bronzes so far. This is sure to push their stock price up substantially for the coming year."
Did not RTFA.
It's a proper noun, folks.
BTW, my personal opinion on Lua:
It's a fun language to learn, because at the core it is *so* simple. In less than a week a good scripter can fully wrap their head around everything that Lua has to offer from the scripting side (not the C++ side; that might be another week). It's rather elegant, really, with convenient syntax for integer-based for-loops that automatically create a new copy of the loop variable on each pass for simple closure creation.
However, when you get down to actually typing in itwell, it's not as verbose as Java, but there's some real RSI danger there. With it's simple core come decisions like "not only will we not give you foo++, we won't even give you foo+=1". Try typing things like "frameCounter = frameCounter + 1" many times and you'll start to scream. Every day I scripted in Lua at work I would long for the times when I could use Ruby to actually get something done.
For those who know JavaScript and want to get a glimpse of what Lua is like, I have a page on my site: Learning Lua from JavaScript.
I'll be interested to see if they go for WoW-style "raw", imperative Lua (gobs of functions) or a more OOP-style Lua (NB: my site).
In designing the Lua interface for an old Game UI authoring product I originally went with OOP-style Lua. It was (IMHO) a rather elegant wrapper on our DOM. However, we soon found that the memory thrash of using Lua's lightweight userdata to go back and forth between C++ and Lua resulted in poor performance on consoles, and I ultimately had to redesign the interface to be more WoW-like for our next release.
It was a shame, putting more onus on the scripter to manage objects (tables of properties in Lua) based on a 'pointer' passed around to uniquely identify each element in the DOM, and passing that pointer to all relevant functions. But the performance increase was dramatic.
That's all well and good, but what about digits of tau?
The Retina theoretical limit is based on a 'standard' viewing distance for phone displays. If you wanted HD glasses (using a far focal point) you would need much higher res. Did not RTFA, but perhaps that is the sort of target for this.
Either that or it's just geeky dick wagging. :)
Speakeasy.net cut me off in 1999 when a Windows server I had at home was exploited (MSSQL Server...grr) and infected. I called them, they explained what was up and how to fix it. I 'fixed' it, called them back, and they put me back online...and then offline again 12 hours later because I hadn't cleaned it all up properly. (My then-girlfriend-now-wire really wanted to play Quake 3 Team Arena...I didn't have time to fight Windows!) I fixed it for real, and they put me right online again.
It was frustrating at the time, but I knew then and I know now that what they did was what I wish more companies did.
What defines HUMAN$? Redefine the variable, the law is still satisfied. We hoomanz do it with brainwashing and conditioning. They're not humans, they're gooks. They don't even believe like we do. It's fine to kill them. Heathens anyway, right? But I'd like to think the robot might be able to work it even more subtly, subverting the law.
Or perhaps the robot will take the laws very seriously, to ill effect.
FTA:
"About: ... We use the term graffiti for our work since we are storing data in a way that non-network participants may regard as unsightly or unwanted vandalism. ..."
"Update: ... It was never our intention to maliciously deface sites, ..."
I don't blame them for changing their tune once they came under fire, but I'm surprised that they have both statements on the page at once. Or am I somehow seeing a contradiction where none exists?
I *guess* it's legal to do this. Heck, if it was monetary, I'd even support it as reasonable. ("If you come to court, it costs us $60 to run the trial, and you have to pay that additional fee if you lose. But if you pay in advance you basically get $60 off.") But this bribery with points reductions seems wrong.
In my last case, they even changed it from a speeding ticket to a "defective vehicle" ticket (which my car is definitely not) in order to justify the points drop and (unwritten) to help with car insurance costs.
Bribing citizens to give up their right to go to court, by promising to help protect their record for insurance costs, feels really wrong.
To bandy words, an "opportunity" is an intangible thing that can almost certainly be agreed upon to exist while at the same time never being a sure thing.
"Dude, that move totally impressed her! She's smiling at you! Go say something witty, this is your opportunity to start a good conversation with an attractive woman!"
"Aw, nevermind...Pat just told her about your goat porn collection."
...
An opportunity can also palpably be lost, or be taken away.
Imagine you operate a store selling clothes that are the latest fashion, heavily in demand. You're selling heavily every day and making massive profit. Now people outside the store somehow manage to convince customers that the fashion is stupid. Nobody wants to buy your goods.
There was no guarantee you were going to sell to as many people today as yesterday, but the opportunity looked good. You still have all your inventory. Nothing has been 'lost'...and yet suddenly you're making a lot less than you were before.
I don't personally believe 99% of what the RIAA says about their profits and piracy and such. Yet I cannot reject an argument that says that piracy reduces some demand. (Not every download is a lost sale, but it slowly adds up.)
I also don't personally know if I believe that the current model of capitalism and 'ownership' makes sense. I'm not saying that I believe that it's necessarily immoral to deprive the RIAA of that revenue. But you can't say that piracy results in "no loss" for the 'legal' purveyors of the booty.
From over 2 years ago on slashdot.jp: http://slashdot.jp/article.pl?sid=05/02/02/0340256 (pseudo-english translation)
What is an "undo" burden? When the school requires the student to remember what the last 10 edits s/he made to the paper were, so on command they can revise it?
I think you meant an undue burden. :)
I can't tell if this is an indication of how adept the human mind is at seeing patterns where there are none (or seeing what it wants to see), or if it's an indication of how adept it is at throwing out a bunch of random points and 'feeling' the median score.
Ruby is a dynamically typed, strongly typed, runtime-interpretted, very object-oriented programming language. It was created about the same time as Python (10+ years ago?), but is less well-known in the United States as it originated in Japan. It is the langauge that the Ruby on Rails web framework is based on. See the official Ruby website for more information.
And Dish Network's DVR remote comes with explicit "30 second forward" and "10 second back" buttons. I love it. I used to have a Tivo, and I love having this feature built-in.
They barely explain it, as far as I'm concerned. I'd be interested in knowing exactly what sorts of problems they have with Safari's design mode support. Maybe they're already talking directly with Apple; in case they're not, I'd like to know specifics instead of vague claims that ~"stuff doesn't work fully".
I'm sure it's faster than the horribly slow speed the OP was describing, but what you've written is not true. My TV's tuner changes channels blazingly fast. Holding down the up-channel button initially changes at about 1 channel per second, and then speeds up to perhaps 3-4 channels per second. And that initial 1 second per channel is an instant change to the channel, followed by 1 second of watching the channel before moving on to the next.
Contrast this with my series 2 Tivo on analog cable. Pressing up channel pauses 1-2 seconds before I can even start seeing the new channel. It's really, really frustrating, coming from high-performance channel surfing.