What? I meant that the good ones (i.e. rational and thinking) girls are usually unavailable and since I saw something mentioning that you were gay in your profile I used you as a prime example. If anything I was being complimentary.
Sure, just because you learn what's wrong doesn't mean that you know what's right. I'm not sure where our conversation was going but we seem to have reached a point of agreement so I'll shut up now.:)
If you find yourself in SomethingOrOtherstan in the middle of a stoning and you pick up a rock and throw it, this doesn't mean that that's what's naturally expected of you because the situation glorifies that behavior. It means that you are a sadistic and cowardly asshole, even if it was socially acceptable.
The question becomes, do we want covert or overt assholes? Damn this conversation is depressing no-matter which side you're on...
If the guy who had won that Nobel prize for GM food (don't remember his name, I had seen him on Bullshit!) is right then we won't be able to sustain our population with non GM food. And of course people will ban GM food by voting with their wallets, as you said. That's quite a situation...
Ok, I doubt that it'll come to that but it makes for a nice topic.
Nope, no kids and no self-discipline either but I haven't turned into a thieving, druggy, alcoholic, sex addict, serial killer, mysogynistic womanizer even though when I was a kid I stole an ice cream, tried pot, drunk beer, watched porn, played FPS games and fooled around with girls. Point of fact, from what people tell me I've turned out quite alright.
So if your kid wants a piece of cake for breakfast just give it to them, it won't ruin their damn lives.
Like I said, trust them at first and keep trusting them until they cross the line (and by that I don't mean until the kill a hooker) and then tell them that they fucked up and take away their decision making privillages for an amount of time.
Obviously, we're talking about kids as if one size fits all and that's not the case but it's nice to make conversation.:)
Why do you feel like people are so totally completely succeptible to every piece of shit thing to do out there AND are willing to adopt it? These are exactly the things one can learn NOT to do and it's not like these don't happen in real life either, learn from the virtual assholes before dealing with the real-life ones down the line -- like psycho CEOs etc.
Also, rational, thinking girls, which we find appealing, end up switching teams (like yourself) so after a while the chances of a proper relationship with a woman seem slimmer and slimmer. And why invest emotionally when you know that it won't work out? I seriously doubt that a guy would meet his perfect mate but stay distant and awkward on principle.
Like you said, people need to out-grow the Disney propaganda.
Can we stop using the word "addictive" for any, freaking, enjoyable thing out there?
When I was a kid I used to play Gran Tourismo 2 all day (and how much of the night I managed to stay awake) and the same thing went for any video game I liked. Actually, the same thing was true for listening to music, hanging out with my buddies and chatting up girls and whatever else I enjoyed doing.
So, just take a breather before over-re(or pro, in your case)-acting...
If a kid is at a stage where he can get aroused by porn then he's at a proper age to watch it, if he/she can't really tell what's going on (or why it is going on) then it makes no difference.
Ok, all that is based on my own experience and is the definition of anecdotal evidence but to all future parents: please trust your kids unless they give you reason to believe otherwise.
And by that I mean that guys who aren't that social in the first place can now at least get some interaction with others via games and get more comfortable with sexual matters via porn.
But no...it can't be that. We better start ringing the town bells on the word of a bunch of repressed pseudo-doctors.
I used to use a modem for that back in the dial-up days; when I wanted to go on-line but someone in the house was using the phone I sent a message to the modem via the terminal and it started screaching bloody murder.
I've been writing Ruby for a couple of years now and a couple of weeks ago I went for an interview about a position with heavy Ruby coding.
During one of the interviews, the guy hit the nail on the head:
A lot of people don't write Ruby when they're coding in Ruby.
In reality, Ruby practices make a lot of sense under the context of the language and when you get comfortable with them then you've reached a position when you can take advantage of what Ruby has to offer -- mainly brevity (without sacrificing clarity) and flexibility (crazy introspection and meta-programming capabilities).
There are a lot of things in the Ruby universe that suck (the interpreter can be quirky, gem management can bit flaky, documentation could be better), the language proper is not one of them.
However, (surprise, surprise) like with anything else in life, you've got to weigh the pros and cons and find something that suits you and/or your needs.
Ruby suits a lot of people's needs, that's why it exists, obviously -- so no, we're not where we were 20 years ago, not by a looong shot.
...I've got to say that if a fellow pen-tester managed to find a really deep, complex and convoluted vulnerability in by code then that's fair game and kudos to him.
This though...bitten by a debugging flag, the dev must be hitting the sauce right about now.
Now, putting my coder hat back on, why was a debugging flag left enabled while building for production?
That's just lazy/bad setup, everyone knows that you keep your environments separate.
Although I admire your attempt to subtly reframe the issue and fuzz what I said, you have nonetheless miserably failed to do so adequately. I'll leave the rest as an exercise to the reader, let's see if you can spot the BS.
This is baffling, why does everyone assume that all people are equal and of equal worth under all possible circumstances? Yes, the CEO is far more important to the company than the sandwich guy.
This can either mean that a lying CEO can mess up the image of the company so it's imperative that he be sacked immediately or it can go completely the other way, i.e. he's the CEO, he can't just be fired over an irrelevant typicality.
Anyways, my point it that there's not a single drop of hypocrisy in this.
I’m so glad I didn’t start a media business. It’s actually really tough to get new and interesting stories and to avoid falling into drama. People forget that Techcrunch was built step-by-step as a new publishing form was taking shape. PandoDaily doesn’t have that advantage and, is, indeed, facing competition from social networks that is quite good indeed.
I no longer visit blogs. I watch Twitter, Google+, and Facebook, along with Hacker News, Techmeme, Quora. These are the new news sources.
Plus, Pando Daily actually doesn’t have enough capital to compete head on with, say, D: All Things Digital or The Verge, both of which are expanding quickly and have ecosystems behind them.
There's nothing worth censoring in that comment, a guy made a post, the system flagged it as spam, it was a simple false positive. The fact that it's the first that we know of is pretty damn impressive, means that their system is probably working quite well.
I wish that the editors would quit with the sensationalist crap already, can we please use some common sense next time?
They're probably playing hardball...ask for too much in order to receive a lot. Like you said, killing Dalvik would only hurt them, it wouldn't make any sense to actually enforce that even if they get the authority to do so.
Unfortunately, that's business....
Slashdot Mirror
Sure it is...genius.
I know, I was going for Funny actually. :)
...when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Dipshit...
Pachelbel Rant
...best avoid those pesky cosmic traffic cops.
What? I meant that the good ones (i.e. rational and thinking) girls are usually unavailable and since I saw something mentioning that you were gay in your profile I used you as a prime example. If anything I was being complimentary.
Sure, just because you learn what's wrong doesn't mean that you know what's right. I'm not sure where our conversation was going but we seem to have reached a point of agreement so I'll shut up now. :)
If you find yourself in SomethingOrOtherstan in the middle of a stoning and you pick up a rock and throw it, this doesn't mean that that's what's naturally expected of you because the situation glorifies that behavior. It means that you are a sadistic and cowardly asshole, even if it was socially acceptable.
The question becomes, do we want covert or overt assholes? Damn this conversation is depressing no-matter which side you're on...
Ah, good to know. Ok then, no harm done. :)
If the guy who had won that Nobel prize for GM food (don't remember his name, I had seen him on Bullshit!) is right then we won't be able to sustain our population with non GM food. And of course people will ban GM food by voting with their wallets, as you said. That's quite a situation...
Ok, I doubt that it'll come to that but it makes for a nice topic.
Nope, no kids and no self-discipline either but I haven't turned into a thieving, druggy, alcoholic, sex addict, serial killer, mysogynistic womanizer even though when I was a kid I stole an ice cream, tried pot, drunk beer, watched porn, played FPS games and fooled around with girls. Point of fact, from what people tell me I've turned out quite alright.
:)
So if your kid wants a piece of cake for breakfast just give it to them, it won't ruin their damn lives.
Like I said, trust them at first and keep trusting them until they cross the line (and by that I don't mean until the kill a hooker) and then tell them that they fucked up and take away their decision making privillages for an amount of time.
Obviously, we're talking about kids as if one size fits all and that's not the case but it's nice to make conversation.
Why do you feel like people are so totally completely succeptible to every piece of shit thing to do out there AND are willing to adopt it? These are exactly the things one can learn NOT to do and it's not like these don't happen in real life either, learn from the virtual assholes before dealing with the real-life ones down the line -- like psycho CEOs etc.
Also, rational, thinking girls, which we find appealing, end up switching teams (like yourself) so after a while the chances of a proper relationship with a woman seem slimmer and slimmer. And why invest emotionally when you know that it won't work out? I seriously doubt that a guy would meet his perfect mate but stay distant and awkward on principle.
Like you said, people need to out-grow the Disney propaganda.
Can we stop using the word "addictive" for any, freaking, enjoyable thing out there?
When I was a kid I used to play Gran Tourismo 2 all day (and how much of the night I managed to stay awake) and the same thing went for any video game I liked. Actually, the same thing was true for listening to music, hanging out with my buddies and chatting up girls and whatever else I enjoyed doing.
So, just take a breather before over-re(or pro, in your case)-acting...
If a kid is at a stage where he can get aroused by porn then he's at a proper age to watch it, if he/she can't really tell what's going on (or why it is going on) then it makes no difference.
Ok, all that is based on my own experience and is the definition of anecdotal evidence but to all future parents: please trust your kids unless they give you reason to believe otherwise.
And by that I mean that guys who aren't that social in the first place can now at least get some interaction with others via games and get more comfortable with sexual matters via porn.
But no...it can't be that. We better start ringing the town bells on the word of a bunch of repressed pseudo-doctors.
I used to use a modem for that back in the dial-up days; when I wanted to go on-line but someone in the house was using the phone I sent a message to the modem via the terminal and it started screaching bloody murder.
During one of the interviews, the guy hit the nail on the head:
A lot of people don't write Ruby when they're coding in Ruby.
In reality, Ruby practices make a lot of sense under the context of the language and when you get comfortable with them then you've reached a position when you can take advantage of what Ruby has to offer -- mainly brevity (without sacrificing clarity) and flexibility (crazy introspection and meta-programming capabilities).
There are a lot of things in the Ruby universe that suck (the interpreter can be quirky, gem management can bit flaky, documentation could be better), the language proper is not one of them.
However, (surprise, surprise) like with anything else in life, you've got to weigh the pros and cons and find something that suits you and/or your needs.
Ruby suits a lot of people's needs, that's why it exists, obviously -- so no, we're not where we were 20 years ago, not by a looong shot.
...I've got to say that if a fellow pen-tester managed to find a really deep, complex and convoluted vulnerability in by code then that's fair game and kudos to him.
This though...bitten by a debugging flag, the dev must be hitting the sauce right about now.
Now, putting my coder hat back on, why was a debugging flag left enabled while building for production?
That's just lazy/bad setup, everyone knows that you keep your environments separate.
Although I admire your attempt to subtly reframe the issue and fuzz what I said, you have nonetheless miserably failed to do so adequately. I'll leave the rest as an exercise to the reader, let's see if you can spot the BS.
It was a joke.
This is baffling, why does everyone assume that all people are equal and of equal worth under all possible circumstances? Yes, the CEO is far more important to the company than the sandwich guy.
This can either mean that a lying CEO can mess up the image of the company so it's imperative that he be sacked immediately or it can go completely the other way, i.e. he's the CEO, he can't just be fired over an irrelevant typicality.
Anyways, my point it that there's not a single drop of hypocrisy in this.
I’m so glad I didn’t start a media business. It’s actually really tough to get new and interesting stories and to avoid falling into drama. People forget that Techcrunch was built step-by-step as a new publishing form was taking shape. PandoDaily doesn’t have that advantage and, is, indeed, facing competition from social networks that is quite good indeed. I no longer visit blogs. I watch Twitter, Google+, and Facebook, along with Hacker News, Techmeme, Quora. These are the new news sources. Plus, Pando Daily actually doesn’t have enough capital to compete head on with, say, D: All Things Digital or The Verge, both of which are expanding quickly and have ecosystems behind them.
There's nothing worth censoring in that comment, a guy made a post, the system flagged it as spam, it was a simple false positive. The fact that it's the first that we know of is pretty damn impressive, means that their system is probably working quite well.
I wish that the editors would quit with the sensationalist crap already, can we please use some common sense next time?
Let me guess...lonely geek has a crush on pretty tarrot reader, right?
Why comply? What would the US do, deny entrance to all EU citizens?
Anyone care to explain this?
They're probably playing hardball...ask for too much in order to receive a lot. Like you said, killing Dalvik would only hurt them, it wouldn't make any sense to actually enforce that even if they get the authority to do so.
Unfortunately, that's business....