skap35

<------------------------- Look to the left!

I agree as well. I just love the whole set of GNU tools for programming. Unfortunately, I get paid to write code in VB.NET, so I have to use Visual Studio. However I will say this, the latest MS development tools (that would be VS, .NET 2.0, SQL Server 2005) have some *really cool* features. So it does have a few advantages over GNU and Linux.

Actually I think there is a reason for that. If they actually had good documentation that came with their product then no one would spend money on Microsoft Press books! Give some lousy, free documentation with the product. People become frustrated and are forced to go to the bookstore to buy some "better" documentation. Nice marketing strategy, as annoying as it might be... That said, I will give them credit for MSDN. Anytime I have to look something up I just point google to MSDN and the first hit is almost always exactly what I was looking for. Now if only they could get a halfway decent search function so I wouldn't have to use google's instead.

oops...I didn't notice you said 19th/20th century. I guess that would exclude Decline and Fall, sorry.

Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire By Knuth I assume you are referring to The Art of Computer Programming. If so, I agree. I've never found another source for comp sci that goes into such detail on everything related to the subject.

I've heard that Fedora Core 3 is better than 4 as well. But I've never used either one of them. Out of curiousity why do you like 3 better than 4?

Which Linux distribution does everyone use? I'm planning on upgrading the back end hosts on my network, as well as my development machines and am trying to figure out which distribution will best fit my needs. I have one machine that is acting as a firewall, running Red Hat 9 and another machine that I use for software development that is running the same OS. I also have another machine that I plan on setting up as a PPTP server. Basically, most of my Linux machines serve some sort of network function and that's it. I won't be installing a GUI on any of these machines so end user software is not a concern. However, on my development machine as well as my laptop, a good end user type distro is required since I will be using these two machines on a daily basis. So I really have two needs: an OS that I will rarely interact with directly (for the firewall/VPN server) and another that is good for programming tasks. Any thoughts?

I'm surprised Kant didn't make that list.

Strangelove: There are a few things you've got to understand. 1. The girl has just made a major life change by leaving behind her old life to come to college. For some people (girls in particular) that is hard to do. On top of that you are asking her to make another big change in the midst of her getting used to college life. 2. It sounds like this is the first girl you've ever had a romantic interest in since coming to college. There are a lot of other girls out there that may be even more compatible with you than this one. So given those two points, my advice to you is to just give the girl a little room. She may like you very much but before she's ready to start a relationship she is going to have to get used to this whole college thing. So it's possible that given enough time, she might be ready to start a relationship. But it's also very possible (and more likely than not) that she will end up never wanting a relationship with you. Just be her friend for a while. Back off and give her some time to get over her old life. At the same time, go out and try to meet other girls. You might get together with her after a while (but to be brutally honest it doesn't sound like it's going to happen) or you might find someone else.

I suppose it wouldn't help to mention that the quote came from a woman.

I always figured Boortz would have AS on his list, but never heard him mention it. But I'm just curious, what is "Frederic Bastiat's Law"? I've never heard of it but if it beat out AS on Boortz's top books I figure it must be good...

What calculator? Back in high school (when I first discovered programming) I used to do *tons* of programming on my TI-85 and later my TI-89. heh, I still have all my old source code and boy was it messy!

I think it depends on what part of the world you live in. In America, I do see a (small) trend toward a more Objectivist way of thinking. And I've heard that Ayn Rand is the best selling philosopher right now (not sure if I'm right on that). But if you are talking about Europe, I think things will get worse before they get better. The only way certain people will realize the errors of socialism/communism is to experience the negative effects of that system. And I personally think that will have to happen in Europe before people start embracing Objectivism.

I don't know much about the details, but from the first moment I heard about the EU seveal years ago, it struck me as a sort of European only version of the UN. And we all know how much "benefit" has come from that organization.

That would be fine in any other case. But in dealing with the cases in the link I provided, the problem is that the company is unwilling to turn over the source code to anyone. So the closed session safeguard you mentioned can't even take place because the company has refused to cooperate. So your two arguments to justify not revealing code in open court were 1. an expert witness evaluation of the code or 2. a closed session evaluation of the code. The problem is that the company isn't even allowing either of those two options to be exercised. If the company was cooperating at least with one of those two options, I wouldn't see a problem. But this case is a different situation.

Welcome, Apollo. It's always nice to meet a fellow programmer and, of course, Southpark fan. I noticed you intend to study game programming. Have you worked on any computer games at all?

I have a problem with relying on this solution. Granted, "black box" testing like this would probably work in most situations. However, you can never prove conclusively that there are no bugs in the software without actually seeing the code. More importantly however, is that just as a matter of principle, I think the accused has a right to review the method used to prove his guilt. Take forensic science for example. Every action taken by a forensic scientist is rigorously reviewed by the defense team to find any flaws in his method. Relying on a black box independent review of a breathalizer is no different from simply taking the forensic scientist's word for it in a trial. The defense team needs to be able to review the method (source code) used to prove the defendant's guilt.

Arthur C. Clarke...is there really any competition? The whole 2001 series covers every branch of science that I am intersted in. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Clarke the person credited with the invention of the satelite? Not actually creating one, but the basic idea of them?

It didn't belong to any one person. It was just part of the general ration supply that was on the raft. The movie didn't specify. The narrator just refers to it as "the last of the fresh water." And the man who survived the fighting had just enough to live until he was rescued. Basically it comes down to this: whoever wins gets to live, but first he has to kill the other two.

I doubt most Indians have their self-esteem damaged from their tribe being honored: There was a big controversy over this issue with a school in my area (Miami University in Ohio). The funny thing about this is a coworker was telling me the other day about an interview he saw with a member of the Miami tribe. The best quote from the guy was "here we go again, the white man telling us what we should be offended by." In the case of the school in my area, the entire school was dedicated to honoring this tribe. They even had special scholarships for members of the tribe, the school itself was named after it, and most of the tribe's members were certainly not offended by it. But outside groups like the APA came in and forced them to change their name to "The Redhawks." The fact is, the majority of this nonsense isn't even started by the people who are "supposed" to be offended by it. It's started by groups like this who have nothing better to do but push their own agenda on various schools.

There was a recent Slashdot article here that talks about how DUI cases are being thrown out left and right in a Florida county. The reason is that defendants have been asking for information about how the breathalizer works (in other words asking for the source code). The company that makes this particular breathalizer is unwilling to release the code. And since the state has basically failed to produce that key evidence, these cases are dismissed. The logic behind these decisions applies to many other aspects of the government such as radar guns, and in particular, voting machines. So when it comes to the government, should they be forced to use only open source software? Keep in mind, I'm not talking about banning Windows from government computers or anything like that. I'm specifically talking about when it comes to proving someone's guilt or innocence or dealing with counting votes.

Well I must say, I really don't like you anymore, Prometheus! I am jealous! But I am curious, what type of 64-bit software do you use on that system? Most people don't need a 64 bit chip at all...

That's another thing I don't like about Microsoft. Conforming to standards isn't exactly their #1 priority when it comes to developing new software.

I was watching The Island of Dr. Moreau and it got me to thinking. In the beginning scene there are three people lost at sea. There is exactly enough water for one person. Two of the people begin fighting over the last of the water supply. What is the morally correct way of dealing with this situation? As far as I understand it, Rand's concept of "rational self interest" suggests that I fight for the last of the water for my own survival. However, that entails that I murder the other people for my own survival. Am I correct in my understanding? If I am in a desperate situation and my survival depends on the premptive destruction of my potential opponents, am I morally correct in doing so?

This is nonsense. With IPv6 it is computationally infeasible to use up all available addresses. Therefore every nation is guaranteed a "fair share" of IP address spaces. What this comes down to is one issue: UN power. IPv6 can support 2^128 possible addresses. Given such a huge address space it is assinine to even suggest that other developing nations don't get a fair share of space. If they don't want to adopt the new standard then they will pay for it with fewer addresses. Not to mention the fact that most of the Internet's infrastructure is located in the United States. Moving name servers to Europe/China/Africa just doesn't make any sense from an efficiency standpoint. If most requests made to the root servers originate in the United States then it only makes sense to have the root servers in the same place. It's just less distance to travel; making it faster and putting less of a strain on key routers. Any networking person will tell you that this is ridiculous. It has nothing to do with "being fair" or improving network efficiency. It is nothing but yet another attempted power grab by the United Nations.