It's actually been shown that excessive TV watching _increases_ ADHD tendencies in kids, _decreases_ their learning capability, and for infants, slows their linguistic and motor skills by up to a year.

It has also been shown that in adults, TV has such a "relaxing" (read "dumbing down") effect that your brain activity is _lower_ that when you are at a normal complete rest. You are actually vegetableizing yourself by watching TV.

My recommendation is to give up TV completely. Personally I did not long ago, and I've never been more pleased with myself, I sleep better, I have more time to do what I like to do (recently took up learning Japanese as a fourth language)....

TV isn't your friend, no matter how you turn the table :)

!dolc evitisnesni uoy .\ eb dluow ti nehT

No, it's not. The class is never instantiated, which means it doesn't exist, and thus the functions can't be part of it.

If you want a class-restrictive language to yelp about, do smalltalk. It's nice, but it's still all-OOP.

And what about Ruby?

Still, if people put the methodology before them like a weapon of mass-disapprovement, they're going to get disappointed. En masse.

The old icelandic saying "árinni kennir illur ræðari" (a bad rower blames his oar) fits this discussion perfectly - a bad programmer blames the language.

No you don't.

You only need a wrapper class.

public class Somestuff {
      public static void doStuff() { doMoreStuff(); }
      public static void doMoreStuff() { System.out.println("mo stuff!"); }
      public static void main(String[] args) { doStuff(); }
}

Yes, ugly code. Yes, perfect sample. Zero class instantiations.

Actually, a large part of a system I wrote in Java does just this because I couldn't spare the overhead of object creation.

...which are very probably (given the right analysis and access to accounting data).

Look at the gaming market of the Commodore Amiga in the late A1200 years. Piracy was at such a height that the piracy scene often had the games in wide distribution before the gaming companies, and in one case (If I recall correctly the company affected was Psygnosis) a game was actually released in the piracy scene _before_ it was released to market by the company (which implies a disgruntled employee).

If you want proof for actual piracy damage, you must look at the early years. This is what every of the drones thinking up their fictional damages are using for base, and the Amiga gaming companies may be the ones actually able to shed some light on the matter - especially those which were UK based.

really has nothing to do with it?

I've spent more than two years working as an Apple Tech (sic) and I tell ya' the designs are crap. Everything is looks, nothing is for functionality, durability or value.

Apple sells the thickest chocolate coating out there, and still it's just turds inside. The thicker coating is just to hide the fact that the turds are even fouler than those of Packard Bell...

No, I'm not an Apple tech anymore. Meteorology and Computer Science prove to be a better way to spend your time. And yes, I'm getting rid of my Apple shit. Never had an iPhone of iPad. Never will.

If your'e thinking about the time when compiling a (pretty much any at all) GNU app on HPUX or AIX too like three weeks of code modifications and Makefile manipulations, then long gone are those days :)

OpenSolaris is generally not any harder than your (randomly selected) Linux distribution.

And yes, ZFS and Zones are... THE thing.

Period.

What is with Linux developers/distributors that the absolutely must "create their own" ?

Nicholas Negroponte has already announced that he's going for a diet-Linux on his tablet.

The WePad ( http://wepad.mobi/ ) is already at point of mass distribution, mixing Android and Linux in an innovative way.

Others are already doing diet versions of Linux for tablets (lenovo springs to mind)

Why can't they just cut the crap, get their forces together and create that ONE diet-Linux monolith GUI distro that not just debunks the "Linux always comes third" myth, but destroys the iTampon ?

I mean... it's not that hard. Talk to each other. Use Google and see if anyone already started a project. Take off your shades! (They look dorky when sitting in front of a computer screen anyway!)

covers all the bases this could ever touch...

*sigh* I'll end up with no hope for humanity.

True, a security audit was truly in order.

However, having seen what Navision is like on the inside, I can assure you that auditing a giganormous pile of dog poo would be of a much higher interest.

Navision should have been scrapped on day 1.

Microsoft Money (which was actually Microsoft's own) was of much higher quality, and would have had better chance of becoming a real accounting package.

Oh... you know WHY Dynamics/Navision/Fjölnir uses a database ?

Because it's cheaper than having a massive amount of plaintext files open at once.

Yup. They don't use the goodness of the database at all. No relations, no normalization, and if at all possible, duplicate all data everywhere. Makes you want to puke.

But then, so does Danish cheese...

This is actually NOT a piece of Microsoft software.

Microsoft Dynamics is what used to be known as "Navision Financials", and before that "Fjölnir". It's a piece of extremely crappy software written in Denmark and is based on a Pascal engine where everything is loosely glued together.

Fjölnir was I think the first financial system Denmark exported. Much to the horror of a neighbour country - Iceland, where Fjölnir became mainstream on HPUX and DOS.

http://www.snerta.is/images/stories/products/fjolnir.gif

Navision (the Windows version) was not a rewrite or redesign of Fjölnir as much as it was placing an abhorrent GUI on top of a ghastly DOS program.

Microsoft however got interested when they realised that all of the nordic countries were using Navision.

So in effect, I think this vulnerability may be traced all the way back to Fjölnir in the mid 90-s, and as such, blame the security on a sixpack of Carlsberg and one lazy Dane who didn't take security classes at school...

I mean... really... Caesar cipher ?

Can I laugh out loud now ?

Oh... I know how to spell i-d-1-0-t. Wonder if the original authors do...

So does the Mac (running Mac OS), so the Speccy wins ;)

Your (rebranded as Timex Sinclair 1000) Sinclair ZX-81 doesn't have IP support (hell... it doesn't even have ethernet support), so you may just as well carve your option in a block of limestone and mail it in to CmdrTaco HQ.

My MacBook "Pro" 2.6GHz 17" yada yada lotsofcrap actually IS more sluggish (with Mac OS crapware) than my Amiga 1200 (unmodified) HD

Um...

I think my Sinclair Spectrum 48K is even less sluggish ;-D

Not alltogether right, but close.

Extended-Density disks were 2880M ( twice the density of HD disks). These were however used only in select few machines (notably IBM and NeXT)

additionally....

PC Formats were
High density 3.5" was 1.44MB, and HD5.25" was 1.2MB
Quad density 5.25" was 720K
Double density 3.5" was 720K and DD5.25" was 360K

5.25" also came in Single-Sided variants at half the capacity.

If you happened to have a SS drive, you could buy a puncher that punched id-holes on the "other side" of the disks so that you could flip them over and use the other side. This was common in the Apple //e and Apple ][, ][+

Atari used the PC format.

Amiga used 880KB DD-disks with a proprietary formatting, and also offered 1760KB with HD-disks.

The Machintosh used 800KB disks

Currently I have about 200 disks for my Amiga, 100 disks for my Archimedes, 20 3" CF-disks for my Amstrad CPC and several disks for DOS, C64 and more. "And they ain't goin' nowhere" (yes, I know, double negation et al. It just sounds cool when you say it with a southern accent ;) )