...if it doesn't have an internet connection? Or how about if I block all the ad servers on my router? Even if some company tries to do this, there are easy ways to defeat this that have been used for decades now.
I know what a DAW is and how to use one. The entire point of my post flew over your head and you turds turned this into DAW's vs. Audacity which is ridiculous. But whatever pompous narcissists. You don't see me going around talking condescending about my knowledge of music production or my proficiency as a musician. I don't need to do that because I don't have a big ego like the rest of you.
That's because this is an audio editing software *not* a DAW. Know the tools and what they do before drawing conclusions.
If you want multi track, real time processing and mixing you are after software like Ardour, Reaper, Pro Tools etc etc. Different tool, different purposes.
Thanks I get it now!
Audio editing software: theme support and more themes = better software DAW: no correlation between theme support and more themes with better software
I never realized this before, I will keep this in mind in my future audio recording software selections. Thank you so much.
The new version, dubbed Audacity 2.2.0, adds a range of features and options such as additional user interface themes, and the ability to customize themes for advanced users
That will make such better recordings. Thanks Audacity!
Sorry sir, you are incorrect. A 'deduction' reduces your taxable income. A credit is a direct reduction of taxes ('get back' more on your refund).
The fact that there is so much dispute as to what a tax deduction is seems to be a testament to why 1) the IRS tax code has becoming a behemoth of complexity and 2) Why we have so many folks employed at the IRS
Let me simplify this, effectively a tax deduction is a special form of tax savings that gives special treatment to certain types of citizens to somehow attempt to promote equity in the tax system even though equity is not evident
If demand for wood goes up a lot more deforestation occurs.
It would be ironic if you write that from a deforestated suburb!
This is a very poor argument. Where I am located and my choices for where to live are independent of this logical fact. It makes no difference. It is independent of me. This is probably hard to grasp for the narcissists around here.
Using wood for buildings is good for the environment. If you believe that steel and concrete is better then I'll ask you to show me your math
Everything is a trade-off. Which stands up to a hurricane better? Wood or steel/concrete? Which is more flame retardant? Ever read the children's story of the 3 Little Pigs?
If demand for wood goes up a lot more deforestation occurs. That means less oxygen and ironically, more carbon dioxide! Irony can be pretty ironic some times.
Primitive man would disagree. The elements and disease killed many more than other humans ever did.
Yes, I'm aware of ancient history and this is quite true. However, it is also true that we have found many tools available to make our lives better in this regard. Immunizations, Pasteurization, Refrigeration and all sorts of other things. That still means nature is much better than the self inflicted nonsense that humans inflict on themselves. I mean we have a crazy guy in North Korea that if he could, he would nuke the entire planet so he can "rule the world". That's far more perverse than anything else in nature.
I get what you are saying, but to think like that in absolute terms is to ignore the billions of positive selfless acts that also happen each day among humanity.
It doesn't matter how many selfless acts go on. It matters how people measure their overall quality of life. How do you measure it? Do you measure it like the OECD or some other means? We have Gallup polls and the OECD the demonstrate quite frankly that we need improvement in a variety of areas, not little improvement, BIG improvement. When you see record numbers of people on anti-depressant and anti-anxiety medication, you can conclude we don't live in anything remotely close to a utopia.
Let me put this in perspective for you, I'm going to pick a random example of something so negative that it's beyond belief. Fundamentalist Religion. Using psychology programming and fear tactics to make you terrified of something that isn't real. That's awful. And that's just ONE example.
On a lot of days, I am thankful that life doesn't last forever because it means that dealing with the collective madness of humanity is temporary. Who would want to live forever with that? I mean if you look at life objectively, what is the primary source of psychological suffering for you? I guarantee it's either your own actions or the actions of other human beings. Once you correct your actions, you're left with the others you can't control. We are greedy, manipulative and frequently sadistic because we only care about our own self interest. Nature is not perfect but far less negative than humanity. On occasion, with nature there are some unpleasant things like colds, winter weather, critters eating into your dwelling but nature, even a natural disaster every now and then is by far the minority of annoyances of life. A rainy day is nothing compared to a selfish, malevolent human being.
This reminds me of the song Eclipse by Pink Floyd:
All that you touch
And all that you see
All that you taste
All you feel
And all that you love
And all that you hate
All you distrust
All you save
And all that you give
And all that you deal
And all that you buy,
Beg, borrow or steal
And all you create
And all you destroy
And all that you do
And all that you say
And all that you eat
And everyone you meet
And all that you slight
And everyone you fight
And all that is now
And all that is gone
And all that's to come
And everything under the sun is in tune
But the sun is eclipsed by the moon.
Apparently you don't. Given a C program, what is the output of say gcc. It is insufficient to say "executable". Describe what the executable is composed of and how it is "executed" by the CPU. For bonus points, explain why the output would be different on a 32-bit CPU, 64-bit CPU, Intel, Motorola or ARM processors.
"... you have to be very stupid to write bad code in those languages..." So what you're saying is that most Java and C# programmers are very stupid?
Where did I say "most Java and C# programmers are very stupid?" What I said was if you write very bad code using Java or C# it probably means you're stupid because you have to actually try to do that. It's not hard to follow some basic principles and end up with some halfway decent code in those languages. As far as whether "most" Java and C# programmers fit that definition, I made no claim about that. You shoved words in my mouth, idiot.
That doesn't matter to the end user. The end user only needs to know Python to work with it.
Not much of a programmer then. You don't know what the difference between a library that actually does something and a library that is an API wrapper to something else is. I once was supplied a third party Win32 DLL and built a C# assembly wrapper around it using DllImport and marshaling native data types and stuff. By your logic, you would say the library I wrapped was written in C# because the end-user (I guess third party developer using the wrapper) interacted with the wrapper assembly in C#. When in fact we have no way to know what the Win32 DLL was written in C++, Delphi, etc. Thanks for not only not making a contribution to the discussion but also misleading people because you just want to be right when you're dead wrong.
Perl doesn't encourage or discourage you to write good or bad code.
Nonsense. Any language that has a hard-to-read, terse syntax by definition is more likely to produce difficult to read code compared to a language that was designed to be expressive with readability in mind. Other languages, however, naturally encourage you to gravitate to more readable code. The difference is it's hard to write readable code in Perl, easy to write hard to read code. In other languages, like Java or C# it is easy to write readable code and harder to write unreadable code. In other words, you have to be very stupid to write bad code in those languages or try to write bad code whereas in Perl, you can be trying to write good code and still write hard to read code because of the way the language is designed.
I find it really amusing that many of the people who like to hate PHP are the same people who gleefully jumped on board the Node.js bandwagon.
That's why I asked the question. Javascript/NodeJS basically have the same semantics as PHP with slightly different syntax. So if you hate Javascript but like PHP, you're being irrational.
Nearly all "Fortune 500" companies, even those who claim NOT to use Perl anywhere... often have a ton of Perl automation under the hood. Heck, a fair number of them have COBOL stuff running too---because it works, and there's no reason to change it (yes, it runs on Linux these days).
It's far from obsolete... It's just not the hot new thing that shows up in job search sites.
I hate stupid AC trolls. Here we have a contradictory statement. We claim "Nearly all Fortunate 500 companies use PERL and quite frequently COBOL" and then we have a concession "It's just not the hot new thing that shows up in job search sites". You're claiming the companies have a need for something yet we don't see any open job positions for those skills. Go home troll.
How about most irrelevant language? Why measure the level of hate towards something that is obsolete? I know let's do a study about how many people hate using looms or how many people hate commuting to work on horseback because that's useful information.
They never used pl/sql for all they development like out stupid development team... including all (buzzword) web 2.0 tools.
PL/SQL is awful compared to T-SQL. Glaring example, T-SQL table variables can be used anywhere like any other table and the performance is optimized. In PL/SQL, should I use a collection, a varray, etc. because they are conceptually the same but can only be used in certain contexts because Oracle's PL/SQL design is a Frankenstein monstrosity. Another thing that drives me nuts is MSSQL's query optimizer very rarely ever gets it wrong but you routinely have to specify optimizer hints in Oracle because their optimizer often picks a bad execution plan. And when it does that, it picks a REALLY bad one.
Over the last 40 some odd years I've programmed in dozens of languages. Some I liked, some I was ambivalent about, some I didn't like. But the only language I learned to actually hate is Javascript. Talk about a steaming pile of shit.
Slashdot Mirror
...if it doesn't have an internet connection? Or how about if I block all the ad servers on my router? Even if some company tries to do this, there are easy ways to defeat this that have been used for decades now.
I don't have a big ego like the rest of you.
Yup. Your ego is so not huge that you have to brag about how not huge it is like some egomaniac braggart.
I am selfless enough to worship you as the epitomy of trolls. I bow in sheer awe to your level of proficiency.
I know what a DAW is and how to use one. The entire point of my post flew over your head and you turds turned this into DAW's vs. Audacity which is ridiculous. But whatever pompous narcissists. You don't see me going around talking condescending about my knowledge of music production or my proficiency as a musician. I don't need to do that because I don't have a big ego like the rest of you.
That's because this is an audio editing software *not* a DAW. Know the tools and what they do before drawing conclusions. If you want multi track, real time processing and mixing you are after software like Ardour, Reaper, Pro Tools etc etc. Different tool, different purposes.
Thanks I get it now!
Audio editing software: theme support and more themes = better software
DAW: no correlation between theme support and more themes with better software
I never realized this before, I will keep this in mind in my future audio recording software selections. Thank you so much.
The new version, dubbed Audacity 2.2.0, adds a range of features and options such as additional user interface themes, and the ability to customize themes for advanced users
That will make such better recordings. Thanks Audacity!
They encourage market & resource direction
They sure do but there's a difference between blazing a trail and blazing a trail off a cliff.
Sorry sir, you are incorrect. A 'deduction' reduces your taxable income. A credit is a direct reduction of taxes ('get back' more on your refund).
The fact that there is so much dispute as to what a tax deduction is seems to be a testament to why 1) the IRS tax code has becoming a behemoth of complexity and 2) Why we have so many folks employed at the IRS
Let me simplify this, effectively a tax deduction is a special form of tax savings that gives special treatment to certain types of citizens to somehow attempt to promote equity in the tax system even though equity is not evident
It would be ironic if you write that from a deforestated suburb!
This is a very poor argument. Where I am located and my choices for where to live are independent of this logical fact. It makes no difference. It is independent of me. This is probably hard to grasp for the narcissists around here.
Using wood for buildings is good for the environment. If you believe that steel and concrete is better then I'll ask you to show me your math
Everything is a trade-off. Which stands up to a hurricane better? Wood or steel/concrete? Which is more flame retardant? Ever read the children's story of the 3 Little Pigs?
If demand for wood goes up a lot more deforestation occurs. That means less oxygen and ironically, more carbon dioxide! Irony can be pretty ironic some times.
Primitive man would disagree. The elements and disease killed many more than other humans ever did.
Yes, I'm aware of ancient history and this is quite true. However, it is also true that we have found many tools available to make our lives better in this regard. Immunizations, Pasteurization, Refrigeration and all sorts of other things. That still means nature is much better than the self inflicted nonsense that humans inflict on themselves. I mean we have a crazy guy in North Korea that if he could, he would nuke the entire planet so he can "rule the world". That's far more perverse than anything else in nature.
I get what you are saying, but to think like that in absolute terms is to ignore the billions of positive selfless acts that also happen each day among humanity.
It doesn't matter how many selfless acts go on. It matters how people measure their overall quality of life. How do you measure it? Do you measure it like the OECD or some other means? We have Gallup polls and the OECD the demonstrate quite frankly that we need improvement in a variety of areas, not little improvement, BIG improvement. When you see record numbers of people on anti-depressant and anti-anxiety medication, you can conclude we don't live in anything remotely close to a utopia.
Let me put this in perspective for you, I'm going to pick a random example of something so negative that it's beyond belief. Fundamentalist Religion. Using psychology programming and fear tactics to make you terrified of something that isn't real. That's awful. And that's just ONE example.
I guess immortal jellyfish will need to start dying off now, to satisfy this mathematician's proof.
The Hydra as well. But to be fair, I believe they were referring specifically to human mortality.
On a lot of days, I am thankful that life doesn't last forever because it means that dealing with the collective madness of humanity is temporary. Who would want to live forever with that? I mean if you look at life objectively, what is the primary source of psychological suffering for you? I guarantee it's either your own actions or the actions of other human beings. Once you correct your actions, you're left with the others you can't control. We are greedy, manipulative and frequently sadistic because we only care about our own self interest. Nature is not perfect but far less negative than humanity. On occasion, with nature there are some unpleasant things like colds, winter weather, critters eating into your dwelling but nature, even a natural disaster every now and then is by far the minority of annoyances of life. A rainy day is nothing compared to a selfish, malevolent human being.
This reminds me of the song Eclipse by Pink Floyd:
All that you touch
And all that you see
All that you taste
All you feel
And all that you love
And all that you hate
All you distrust
All you save
And all that you give
And all that you deal
And all that you buy,
Beg, borrow or steal
And all you create
And all you destroy
And all that you do
And all that you say
And all that you eat
And everyone you meet
And all that you slight
And everyone you fight
And all that is now
And all that is gone
And all that's to come
And everything under the sun is in tune
But the sun is eclipsed by the moon.
Apparently you don't. Given a C program, what is the output of say gcc. It is insufficient to say "executable". Describe what the executable is composed of and how it is "executed" by the CPU. For bonus points, explain why the output would be different on a 32-bit CPU, 64-bit CPU, Intel, Motorola or ARM processors.
C foundation that drives everything
You think CPU's execute C code? Interesting... do you even understand what a compiler is?
Not so much...
"... you have to be very stupid to write bad code in those languages..." So what you're saying is that most Java and C# programmers are very stupid?
Where did I say "most Java and C# programmers are very stupid?" What I said was if you write very bad code using Java or C# it probably means you're stupid because you have to actually try to do that. It's not hard to follow some basic principles and end up with some halfway decent code in those languages. As far as whether "most" Java and C# programmers fit that definition, I made no claim about that. You shoved words in my mouth, idiot.
That doesn't matter to the end user. The end user only needs to know Python to work with it.
Not much of a programmer then. You don't know what the difference between a library that actually does something and a library that is an API wrapper to something else is. I once was supplied a third party Win32 DLL and built a C# assembly wrapper around it using DllImport and marshaling native data types and stuff. By your logic, you would say the library I wrapped was written in C# because the end-user (I guess third party developer using the wrapper) interacted with the wrapper assembly in C#. When in fact we have no way to know what the Win32 DLL was written in C++, Delphi, etc. Thanks for not only not making a contribution to the discussion but also misleading people because you just want to be right when you're dead wrong.
Perl doesn't encourage or discourage you to write good or bad code.
Nonsense. Any language that has a hard-to-read, terse syntax by definition is more likely to produce difficult to read code compared to a language that was designed to be expressive with readability in mind. Other languages, however, naturally encourage you to gravitate to more readable code. The difference is it's hard to write readable code in Perl, easy to write hard to read code. In other languages, like Java or C# it is easy to write readable code and harder to write unreadable code. In other words, you have to be very stupid to write bad code in those languages or try to write bad code whereas in Perl, you can be trying to write good code and still write hard to read code because of the way the language is designed.
I find it really amusing that many of the people who like to hate PHP are the same people who gleefully jumped on board the Node.js bandwagon.
That's why I asked the question. Javascript/NodeJS basically have the same semantics as PHP with slightly different syntax. So if you hate Javascript but like PHP, you're being irrational.
Nearly all "Fortune 500" companies, even those who claim NOT to use Perl anywhere... often have a ton of Perl automation under the hood. Heck, a fair number of them have COBOL stuff running too---because it works, and there's no reason to change it (yes, it runs on Linux these days).
It's far from obsolete... It's just not the hot new thing that shows up in job search sites.
I hate stupid AC trolls. Here we have a contradictory statement. We claim "Nearly all Fortunate 500 companies use PERL and quite frequently COBOL" and then we have a concession "It's just not the hot new thing that shows up in job search sites". You're claiming the companies have a need for something yet we don't see any open job positions for those skills. Go home troll.
How about most irrelevant language? Why measure the level of hate towards something that is obsolete? I know let's do a study about how many people hate using looms or how many people hate commuting to work on horseback because that's useful information.
They never used pl/sql for all they development like out stupid development team... including all (buzzword) web 2.0 tools.
PL/SQL is awful compared to T-SQL. Glaring example, T-SQL table variables can be used anywhere like any other table and the performance is optimized. In PL/SQL, should I use a collection, a varray, etc. because they are conceptually the same but can only be used in certain contexts because Oracle's PL/SQL design is a Frankenstein monstrosity. Another thing that drives me nuts is MSSQL's query optimizer very rarely ever gets it wrong but you routinely have to specify optimizer hints in Oracle because their optimizer often picks a bad execution plan. And when it does that, it picks a REALLY bad one.
Over the last 40 some odd years I've programmed in dozens of languages. Some I liked, some I was ambivalent about, some I didn't like. But the only language I learned to actually hate is Javascript. Talk about a steaming pile of shit.
How do you feel about PHP?