If you're going to defend this with any sort of analogy, don't make it a law abiding analogy, because the rampant use of flags on everything everywhere in both the democratic and the republican campaigns, including pretty much everywhere else, is in direct violation of US Code on the matter.
US CODE, TITLE 4, SECTION 8 (d) The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or
drapery. It should never be festooned, drawn back, nor up, in folds, but
always allowed to fall free. Bunting of blue, white, and red, always
arranged with the blue above, the white in the middle, and the red
below, should be used for covering a speaker's desk, draping the front
of the platform, and for decoration in general.
(e) The flag should never be fastened, displayed, used, or stored in
such a manner as to permit it to be easily torn, soiled, or damaged in
any way.
(f) The flag should never be used as a covering for a ceiling.
(g) The flag should never have placed upon it, nor on any part of
it, nor attached to it any mark, insignia, letter, word, figure, design,
picture, or drawing of any nature.
(h) The flag should never be used as a receptacle for receiving,
holding, carrying, or delivering anything.
(i) The flag should never be used for advertising purposes in any
manner whatsoever. It should not be embroidered on such articles as
cushions or handkerchiefs and the like, printed or otherwise impressed
on paper napkins or boxes or anything that is designed for temporary use
and discard. Advertising signs should not be fastened to a staff or
halyard from which the flag is flown.
(j) No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic
uniform. However, a flag patch may be affixed to the uniform of military
personnel, firemen, policemen, and members of patriotic organizations.
The flag represents a living country and is itself considered a living
thing. Therefore, the lapel flag pin being a replica, should be worn on
the left lapel near the heart.
(k) The flag, when it is in such condition that it is no longer a
fitting emblem for display, should be destroyed in a dignified way,
preferably by burning.
Personally, I think this code is ridiculous, but if you're going to cite patriotism and fly straight in the face of supposedly patriotic legislation in doing so, you're doing something wrong. I'm glad to see that not everyone is feverish about putting flags everywhere and on everything, as it cheapens the symbol. How that is unpatriotic, I don't know.
Are there any consumer grade hardware cryptography engines to offload the work from your CPU to dedicated hardware? It seems like there'd be a big market for it nowadays.
Oh, so -you're- the type of network administrator who implements policies and software for the good of the network, software that's detrimental to the productivity of the people who the network is supposed to be good for, without consulting the users about their needs prior to the rollout?
I'm glad we met. Have you ever considered a career in sales?
We have an XBox 360 in the office, hooked up to a nice 52" Samsung TV, and it's used perhaps once or twice a month. Once the novelty wears off, they'll probably be wanting you to go get them a new expensive gimmick.
You aren't paying to play your -game-, you're paying to play your -content-, in the same way that you don't pay to drive your car when you go to a race track, but you pay to drive your car on their track.
Apparently being Dutch makes you very naive as well. Forging government issued documents is a serious crime no matter where you are, regardless of how benign it might be, and that certainly does not constitute a lack of sanity.
It seems that everything you're arguing could be applied in reverse.
You say that "different doesn't mean more fulfilled" in a post where you more or less provide nothing but your take on why the parent is wrong. If different doesn't mean more fulfilled, then who are you to say that your difference to him is more fulfilling than his difference to you?
You repeatedly say that the parent to your post is missing out on things, and you claim that his views on intimacy are wrong, and that yours are right. You claim to understand that people are different, while over and over again bringing up your subjectively percieved advantages of sexual monogamy as some sort of universal truth, saying that people don't know what they're missing out on because their relationships aren't like yours. People are different, and so are their tastes.
Who are you to say that they would have a profound enlightening experience by adopting sexual and intimate mongamy? They could be as indifferent about sexual monogamy as you are about sexual polygamy.
I have nothing against either choice, I just think you're being hypocritical and arguing for both sides while trying to push one desire as being common to all, when it very obviously is not.
I could list every single one of the claims you make and tell you why they aren't close to being universally true, but it really all ends up in that all of your assumptions about what people want, think and feel in certain situations represent a failure to understand that all people are different, and want, think and feel in their own ways - ways that aren't always the ways that you describe.
That's ridiculous. Upgrading backbone capacity is significantly cheaper than rolling out into sparsely populated areas and setting up appropriate infrastructure. If it isn't economically viable, ISPs won't roll out service in your area. They don't exist to provide you with high throughput; they exist to make money.
Conversely, you sound very authoritative, but you derive it from an argument that because no standardised parameters for a term that basically means "testing" exists, then it must be right to compare the performance of "testing" releases. You're involuntarily making my argument for me here.
"Debugging" generally refers to removing programming errors rather than fine-tuning. Fine-tuning is unlikely to wield an order of magnitude of performance increase, let alone several. If it does, I sincerely doubt that the person who wrote such inefficient code in the first place has picked good algorithms.
Colloquially, and through evolution of terms, "debugging" usually encompasses verbose output to confirm or test events, and excessive and unoptimised code to catch theoretical events. I meant it in that sense of the word.
This is of course all ignoring the simple fact that it is impossible to determine what the "best" algorithm for a web browser would be. It depends entirely on what pages the user will visit (since the optimal code paths vary), and how he uses the browser - for example, does he use the forward and back buttons a lot, which would make caching far more effective ? You could write adaptive code, but that is more complex and introduces its own bloat, as well as new and interesting failure modes (such as the user suddenly changing his habits or multiple users taking turns).
Well, we're talking talking hypothetically about the effects of debugging code, and I meant to present a hypothetical example where even a "best" algorithm as determined by mathematical logic, not necessarily in browser code, could be made to be very inefficient by methods which would not be unusual in a testing environment.
Yes it is. The performance of a product is mainly dependent on the algorithms it uses. Unless you change those - which means that the product is still in alpha, not beta - there can only be minor optimizations.
Alright, suppose that an application is written with the most efficient algorithms possible for the task at hand, which are then debugged at every single step to decrease real performance by several orders of magnitude. Will you then also say that the performance during the debugged beta version is indicative of the performance of the final product?
But it gives a pretty good idea about your handwriting.
Luckily there's little basis for a concrete correlation between poor handwriting and the quality of reports. I know I'd have missed out on a lot of As if there was.
I agree that it seems absurd, and that it suggest complexity far beyond what a web browser should have, but to denounce IE8 because of it, and to criticise it from a performance perspective, before even being a release candidate, I think that's jumping the gun a good bit.
I think the concept of beta testing is lost on you, and a good few moderators as well, apparently. Performance during beta testing is not in any way indicative of the performance of the final product, and performance optimisation during beta is such an individual thing that you cannot establish any kind of gold standard for beta performance, or even get remotely close to having a basis for performance comparison. It's like comparing the visual quality of notes taken during classes. It's not telling on any level of how well you're going to do on your exams.
Conversely, what makes you so confident that I'm going by what the bank tells me? I'm basing this off of a situation my sister was in, in which she was charged an obscene amount of money by her telco by mistake. It took one business day to have the charge reversed, and she incurred no fees or expenses resulting from it.
Slashdot Mirror
Heh, you don't think Cisco equipment with redundancy up the ass goes down every now and then as well? Try managing 1500 boxes.
.. how many of the people complaining here are going to run Windows 7 with more than 256 cores? No, really, I'd love to know why.
Personally, I think this code is ridiculous, but if you're going to cite patriotism and fly straight in the face of supposedly patriotic legislation in doing so, you're doing something wrong. I'm glad to see that not everyone is feverish about putting flags everywhere and on everything, as it cheapens the symbol. How that is unpatriotic, I don't know.
Are there any consumer grade hardware cryptography engines to offload the work from your CPU to dedicated hardware? It seems like there'd be a big market for it nowadays.
Oh, so -you're- the type of network administrator who implements policies and software for the good of the network, software that's detrimental to the productivity of the people who the network is supposed to be good for, without consulting the users about their needs prior to the rollout?
I'm glad we met. Have you ever considered a career in sales?
Re:And the web site was already slow this morning. (Score:5, Insightful)
Apparently it could.
We have an XBox 360 in the office, hooked up to a nice 52" Samsung TV, and it's used perhaps once or twice a month. Once the novelty wears off, they'll probably be wanting you to go get them a new expensive gimmick.
Network capacity is easy to come by. The difficult part is the hardware capacity, and the software connecting this capacity.
If you like the track, why would you want to?
You aren't paying to play your -game-, you're paying to play your -content-, in the same way that you don't pay to drive your car when you go to a race track, but you pay to drive your car on their track.
Go back to Alpha Centauri.
Apparently being Dutch makes you very naive as well. Forging government issued documents is a serious crime no matter where you are, regardless of how benign it might be, and that certainly does not constitute a lack of sanity.
Tell that to Fortis.
It seems that everything you're arguing could be applied in reverse.
You say that "different doesn't mean more fulfilled" in a post where you more or less provide nothing but your take on why the parent is wrong. If different doesn't mean more fulfilled, then who are you to say that your difference to him is more fulfilling than his difference to you?
You repeatedly say that the parent to your post is missing out on things, and you claim that his views on intimacy are wrong, and that yours are right. You claim to understand that people are different, while over and over again bringing up your subjectively percieved advantages of sexual monogamy as some sort of universal truth, saying that people don't know what they're missing out on because their relationships aren't like yours. People are different, and so are their tastes.
Who are you to say that they would have a profound enlightening experience by adopting sexual and intimate mongamy? They could be as indifferent about sexual monogamy as you are about sexual polygamy.
I have nothing against either choice, I just think you're being hypocritical and arguing for both sides while trying to push one desire as being common to all, when it very obviously is not.
I could list every single one of the claims you make and tell you why they aren't close to being universally true, but it really all ends up in that all of your assumptions about what people want, think and feel in certain situations represent a failure to understand that all people are different, and want, think and feel in their own ways - ways that aren't always the ways that you describe.
If anything, it looks like you have a lot to learn about people, and how different they really can be.
That's ridiculous. Upgrading backbone capacity is significantly cheaper than rolling out into sparsely populated areas and setting up appropriate infrastructure. If it isn't economically viable, ISPs won't roll out service in your area. They don't exist to provide you with high throughput; they exist to make money.
Imagine that - a world populated solely by celebrities and hardcore gamers. A superior race of shallow procrastinators.
I think we can all agree that google's definition of "beta" is very different from Microsoft's definition of "beta".
Conversely, you sound very authoritative, but you derive it from an argument that because no standardised parameters for a term that basically means "testing" exists, then it must be right to compare the performance of "testing" releases. You're involuntarily making my argument for me here.
"Debugging" generally refers to removing programming errors rather than fine-tuning. Fine-tuning is unlikely to wield an order of magnitude of performance increase, let alone several. If it does, I sincerely doubt that the person who wrote such inefficient code in the first place has picked good algorithms.
Colloquially, and through evolution of terms, "debugging" usually encompasses verbose output to confirm or test events, and excessive and unoptimised code to catch theoretical events. I meant it in that sense of the word.
This is of course all ignoring the simple fact that it is impossible to determine what the "best" algorithm for a web browser would be. It depends entirely on what pages the user will visit (since the optimal code paths vary), and how he uses the browser - for example, does he use the forward and back buttons a lot, which would make caching far more effective ? You could write adaptive code, but that is more complex and introduces its own bloat, as well as new and interesting failure modes (such as the user suddenly changing his habits or multiple users taking turns).
Well, we're talking talking hypothetically about the effects of debugging code, and I meant to present a hypothetical example where even a "best" algorithm as determined by mathematical logic, not necessarily in browser code, could be made to be very inefficient by methods which would not be unusual in a testing environment.
Yes it is. The performance of a product is mainly dependent on the algorithms it uses. Unless you change those - which means that the product is still in alpha, not beta - there can only be minor optimizations.
Alright, suppose that an application is written with the most efficient algorithms possible for the task at hand, which are then debugged at every single step to decrease real performance by several orders of magnitude. Will you then also say that the performance during the debugged beta version is indicative of the performance of the final product?
But it gives a pretty good idea about your handwriting.
Luckily there's little basis for a concrete correlation between poor handwriting and the quality of reports. I know I'd have missed out on a lot of As if there was.
I agree that it seems absurd, and that it suggest complexity far beyond what a web browser should have, but to denounce IE8 because of it, and to criticise it from a performance perspective, before even being a release candidate, I think that's jumping the gun a good bit.
I think the concept of beta testing is lost on you, and a good few moderators as well, apparently. Performance during beta testing is not in any way indicative of the performance of the final product, and performance optimisation during beta is such an individual thing that you cannot establish any kind of gold standard for beta performance, or even get remotely close to having a basis for performance comparison. It's like comparing the visual quality of notes taken during classes. It's not telling on any level of how well you're going to do on your exams.
Conversely, what makes you so confident that I'm going by what the bank tells me? I'm basing this off of a situation my sister was in, in which she was charged an obscene amount of money by her telco by mistake. It took one business day to have the charge reversed, and she incurred no fees or expenses resulting from it.