I have a really hard time coming up with good arguments against open access publishing. Do they exist? Or are all arguments against flat out support of the publishers' business model?
I really really want to believe in Carbon Sequestration, but it just screams bullshit to me. Can anyone point me to analyses of it? Maybe even one or two where it's not bullshit?
All I want for christmas is the Residual (http://www.scummvm.org/subprojects.php) engine to get full time development status so that I can finally finish Grim Fandango.
The FSF are the fundamentalists of the software world, in all fashions.
Read the rationale for this: "Developing nonfree software is not good for society, and we have no obligation to make it easier." No mention of the possibility that developers may be able to decide on their own.
Well, the point he made about the new taskbar being "better", though "cribbed from cupertino".... I find that the ultimate hilarity. the one thing most people I know who use OS X _dislike_ is the dock. Myself included (though, I find pinning the dock to be significantly better, and that's basically done by default I think in 7. (to pin: defaults write com.apple.dock pinning -string start) )
Of course, it's too bad what you say about compilers... really, that's where my interest lies. I guess I'll just have to make my own way there. Of course, my interest in compilers is optimizations not the standard parser -> IL -> machine code route (which, yes, is easily outsourced).
I wish I had mod points; Easily the best comment in the discussion.
Yeah, the attitude in here that CS == Coding seems to be quite.... backwards at least from my POV. Of course, my POV is that a CS Degree is about computation, Software Eng is the coding, and IT is the Enterprise putting components together.
There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.