I suggest that a runner should spend his time thinking.
It's my firm belief that the reason so many people use cell phones while driving and speed while driving is that they need a distraction from being left alone with their own thoughts. They need something to take them away before they start thinking.
For the same reason, most people hate distance running.
Imagine having 1 uninterrupted hour of being able to think about anything you want. If that appeals to you, get started with your distance training. If it doesn't, play a sport, climb rocks or get a track bike and weave in and out of traffic.
I was in a running club with professional runs at one time. The club had everyone from the 5k record holder down to people that could barely make it around the park. One of the people there just to lose weight asked one of the professionals when it stopped hurting. The guy said, "it never stops hurting. it's about making the other guy hurt more."
Or, if you prefer, Lawerence of Arabia: (Lawrence has extinguished a match with his fingers, Potter attempts to do the same)
Potter: "Ooh! It damn well 'urts!"
Lawrence: "Certainly it hurts."
Potter: "What's the trick then?"
Lawrence: "The trick, William Potter, is not minding that it hurts."
1. The free version of Python is the standard version. So a new developer will get to use exactly what the best developers are using.
2. Libraries.
Re:and EVERYBODY knows the hardest puzzle is....
on
Celebrating Puzzles
·
· Score: 1
I've solved this puzzle before but it takes about twice as long as I care to work on it. You also have to restart from the beginning every day. Bad moves can't be undone and can sometimes upset the status of the puzzle at any random moment in the future.
Re:Something seems strange with the move numbers
on
Celebrating Puzzles
·
· Score: 1
You don't just get to claim the lost sale price as your loss. You don't really write off the "loss" you get to deduct all your expenses from your gross revenues. If you bring in $20, and it cost you $50 to make, you have $30 to offset any other profits before you are taxed. It is irrelevant what you planned to sell it at.
That said, there can be some funny accounting games that happen within a company. Say you record $100 revenue the minute you ship that RAM ($20 to make), you record $80 profit. The next year when it fails to sell you liquidate it for $50. This is when you write off the $50 difference *because you'd already recorded (and presumably paid taxes on) the $80 profit the year before. This is fairly normal accounting but gets into grey and further into illegal areas when you shift tax burdens and smooth revenues rather than try to portray the company's books accurately.
I'd pay for hard drive space at Google. I use about 5 different computers. Installing Office on all of them is expensive and a pain to move files between. I'd be willing to pay for hard drive space to store all my documents that I could use from any computer with a browser. Well, at least I'd prefer to pay for that compared to MS Office.
I'd even be willing the grant you your guess at the origin of today's usage of "begs the question. However, my point is defining proper usage of a phrase is entirely different than the spelling of a word. The phrase "begs the question" probably took over in its current usage because it is more descriptive than merely "raises the question". For instance:
A guy walks into a bar with a duck on his shoulder, which begs the question, "why does he have a duck on his shoulder?" The word "begs" in this situation strikes people as much more appropriate than "invites" or "raises". I really don't think they are trying to apply the name of a logical fallacy, to them this situation "begs" or "demands" or "elicits".
As long as the phrase makes sense and isn't describing some other fallacy I don't see how it can be wrong. It all sounds like one faction claiming exclusive use of a phrase for their specific domain.
I've always wondered about this. It seems to me it would only be an improper usage if it were applied incorrectly in describing some other logical fallacy. Anywhere else it would simply be an English phrase.
I'm not aware of any phrase dictionary that I have to check my phrases against to make sure they don't have some other meaning in some other context. The wikipedia says that "begs the question" is being used as a synonym for "raises the question".
It seems to me that all the arguments that there is only one acceptable use of "begs the question" seem to have the implicit premise that there should only be one use of a phrase.
And just as Java failures are generally due to poor development, so is hard to maintain Perl. The key difference is that often the end result is usable, hard to maintain Perl vs a completely failed java project.
Java has a lot of people saying it's more maintainable. Really? Is it more maintainable than that 40 year old COBOL mess? I'm not buying it, that COBOL mess is still doing work after 40 years and the java replacement will be lucky to see version 1.0.
Now, maybe someone may say java is readable by idiots. I welcome the competitors that aspire to development by idiots.
All the languages can accomplish the same things for the most part. Java just makes you do it in a java style. I suppose this is good for someone that can't manage their own succesful style.
I think Perl gets put down a lot for being unmaintainable because it has allowed people to complete projects they otherwise could never have completed. I've been witness to several Java rewrites of to replace Perl projects and not one as been successful. This is despite the fact that the original Perl programmers "didn't know what they were doing" according to the java "software engineers".
I've maintained Perl for years and have taken over projects written by system administrators that grew from scripts to multi-million dollar revenue streams. These are projects that never would have been completed and never would have become profitable products if produced by the usual set of java software engineers, architects and developers.
Perl isn't unreadable, I read and fix bad Perl every day. I'm thinking most of the java crowd just can't figure things out for themselves.
Then answer to the original ask slashdot is, of course, LISP.
My (2 year old) son plays a game where he runs around in a 3d world using the arrow keys. He only turns left. He can open doors, climb ladders, remember paths from town to town but has no interest in turning right.
He didn't say Wolf3D, he said Wolfenstein. Presumably he was talking about Escape from Castle Wolfenstein from the 80's...now that was a great game although technically it was a 3rd person shooter.
One of the problems with the id's games (as games, not as engines) is that they seem entirely too focused on deathmatch style games. They also seem to have very little taste in weapon design (real or fantastic) as far as FPS games go.
All in all, they seem to have one game formula and they just keep reskinning it.
Slashdot Mirror
I suggest that a runner should spend his time thinking.
It's my firm belief that the reason so many people use cell phones while driving and speed while driving is that they need a distraction from being left alone with their own thoughts. They need something to take them away before they start thinking.
For the same reason, most people hate distance running.
Imagine having 1 uninterrupted hour of being able to think about anything you want. If that appeals to you, get started with your distance training. If it doesn't, play a sport, climb rocks or get a track bike and weave in and out of traffic.
I was in a running club with professional runs at one time. The club had everyone from the 5k record holder down to people that could barely make it around the park. One of the people there just to lose weight asked one of the professionals when it stopped hurting. The guy said, "it never stops hurting. it's about making the other guy hurt more."
Or, if you prefer, Lawerence of Arabia:
(Lawrence has extinguished a match with his fingers, Potter attempts to do the same)
Potter: "Ooh! It damn well 'urts!"
Lawrence: "Certainly it hurts."
Potter: "What's the trick then?"
Lawrence: "The trick, William Potter, is not minding that it hurts."
He has assets with which to pay the rent. Put the copyright to the series up for sale.
Clearly this shows we should be monitoring politicians and not the kids.
No, they will own everything your butt produces.
Would I be allowed physical defense against your physical attack of my environment?
Legend of Zyll.
1. The free version of Python is the standard version. So a new developer will get to use exactly what the best developers are using.
2. Libraries.
I've solved this puzzle before but it takes about twice as long as I care to work on it. You also have to restart from the beginning every day. Bad moves can't be undone and can sometimes upset the status of the puzzle at any random moment in the future.
Fire up emacs:
M-x hanoi
You don't just get to claim the lost sale price as your loss. You don't really write off the "loss" you get to deduct all your expenses from your gross revenues. If you bring in $20, and it cost you $50 to make, you have $30 to offset any other profits before you are taxed. It is irrelevant what you planned to sell it at.
That said, there can be some funny accounting games that happen within a company. Say you record $100 revenue the minute you ship that RAM ($20 to make), you record $80 profit. The next year when it fails to sell you liquidate it for $50. This is when you write off the $50 difference *because you'd already recorded (and presumably paid taxes on) the $80 profit the year before. This is fairly normal accounting but gets into grey and further into illegal areas when you shift tax burdens and smooth revenues rather than try to portray the company's books accurately.
There is a difference between a thinktank and a shill factory.
I'd pay for hard drive space at Google. I use about 5 different computers. Installing Office on all of them is expensive and a pain to move files between. I'd be willing to pay for hard drive space to store all my documents that I could use from any computer with a browser. Well, at least I'd prefer to pay for that compared to MS Office.
At 20M you could probably just email it to them.
An odd situation doesn't ask a question, it invites a question to be asked. This is where people insert begs, not in place of asks.
I'd even be willing the grant you your guess at the origin of today's usage of "begs the question. However, my point is defining proper usage of a phrase is entirely different than the spelling of a word. The phrase "begs the question" probably took over in its current usage because it is more descriptive than merely "raises the question". For instance:
A guy walks into a bar with a duck on his shoulder, which begs the question, "why does he have a duck on his shoulder?" The word "begs" in this situation strikes people as much more appropriate than "invites" or "raises". I really don't think they are trying to apply the name of a logical fallacy, to them this situation "begs" or "demands" or "elicits".
As long as the phrase makes sense and isn't describing some other fallacy I don't see how it can be wrong. It all sounds like one faction claiming exclusive use of a phrase for their specific domain.
I've always wondered about this. It seems to me it would only be an improper usage if it were applied incorrectly in describing some other logical fallacy. Anywhere else it would simply be an English phrase.
I'm not aware of any phrase dictionary that I have to check my phrases against to make sure they don't have some other meaning in some other context. The wikipedia says that "begs the question" is being used as a synonym for "raises the question".
It seems to me that all the arguments that there is only one acceptable use of "begs the question" seem to have the implicit premise that there should only be one use of a phrase.
There is no way a seagull could carry a shark.
I'm done with Zonk.
And just as Java failures are generally due to poor development, so is hard to maintain Perl. The key difference is that often the end result is usable, hard to maintain Perl vs a completely failed java project.
Java has a lot of people saying it's more maintainable. Really? Is it more maintainable than that 40 year old COBOL mess? I'm not buying it, that COBOL mess is still doing work after 40 years and the java replacement will be lucky to see version 1.0.
Now, maybe someone may say java is readable by idiots. I welcome the competitors that aspire to development by idiots.
All the languages can accomplish the same things for the most part. Java just makes you do it in a java style. I suppose this is good for someone that can't manage their own succesful style.
I think Perl gets put down a lot for being unmaintainable because it has allowed people to complete projects they otherwise could never have completed. I've been witness to several Java rewrites of to replace Perl projects and not one as been successful. This is despite the fact that the original Perl programmers "didn't know what they were doing" according to the java "software engineers".
I've maintained Perl for years and have taken over projects written by system administrators that grew from scripts to multi-million dollar revenue streams. These are projects that never would have been completed and never would have become profitable products if produced by the usual set of java software engineers, architects and developers.
Perl isn't unreadable, I read and fix bad Perl every day. I'm thinking most of the java crowd just can't figure things out for themselves.
Then answer to the original ask slashdot is, of course, LISP.
My (2 year old) son plays a game where he runs around in a 3d world using the arrow keys. He only turns left. He can open doors, climb ladders, remember paths from town to town but has no interest in turning right.
You should have googled first...
QWERTY sucks...
Dvorak is unamerican...
vi sucks...
He didn't say Wolf3D, he said Wolfenstein. Presumably he was talking about Escape from Castle Wolfenstein from the 80's...now that was a great game although technically it was a 3rd person shooter.
One of the problems with the id's games (as games, not as engines) is that they seem entirely too focused on deathmatch style games. They also seem to have very little taste in weapon design (real or fantastic) as far as FPS games go.
All in all, they seem to have one game formula and they just keep reskinning it.
Class action lawsuits...you must be a lawyer.
Eight years later I'll get a check for $3.62.