Folks that can't stand reality conflicting with their hate-based fantasies.
What?! Everyone knows that if you keep shouting something over and over so no else can say anything it becomes reality, riiiight? It's similar to putting your fingers in your ears and saying "lalala I can't hear you". It's the magical secret sauce of the universe man. In fact, I think I'll go out in my backyard right now and incessantly yell as loud as I can, "The money tree shall come forth!" Anyone who comes by to call me crazy I'll just talk over them so they can't get a word in edge-wise and I will become RICH! Tee hee! Woo hoo!
Because it's about the trustworthyness of the election system- these calls aren't about changing this month's election results, they're about reliable future elections.
ZOMG, everyone knows the ENTIRE election system it out of date and doesn't reflect that state of the union as it existed 200 years ago. No one does anything about it. Are you going to do something about it? Furthermore, do you believe that our elections have always been accurate down to every last single vote. Think about that for a second. Do you think that's slanted in any particular candidate's favor, really?
You young whipper snappers are talking about this like it's a new thing. 16 years ago when the same EXACT thing happened between Al Gore and George W. Bush and the same exact call for a recount happened after Al Gore conceded: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... That's the thing, Hillary ALREADY conceded. It's done and on the books. Why people keep ruminating about this is beyond me. Life goes on.
Both choices? Both? Seriously? There were states with more than 10 candidates on the ballot. I personally voted for Evan McMullen
Ok Mr./Mrs. Pedant calm down. Take a chill pill and come back down to reality. You're splitting hairs. There are two major political parties, Republican and Democrat. I'm pretty sure you're not stupid enough to not recognize that was implied. I did notice that Gary Johnson scored a record high popular vote for the Libertarian party but come on now. You're acting as if an independent political candidate has any realistic chance of winning a presidential election in the United States. Certain things we need to happen in order for the generally stupid American public to feel compelled to think outside the box. Have you ever bothered to look at the track record of independent candidates over history? So, what do you want to gripe about? That the American public is too stupid to realize they have other choices besides Red and Blue? Go right ahead but I'll tell you it's a complete waste of time and energy and you only get so much in this life.
If you're really that butt hurt over it and you really want to change things, organize a grass roots campaign to change American politics. Ranting and raving on Slashdot isn't going to do a damn thing except possibly get you all worked up to the point that you have a heart attack. Geesh.
Don't be a pussy and try to distance yourself from his extremism.
Own it.
Both choices for president were very flawed in different ways. Your logic is that if you support either candidate that their flaws reflect on the voter's personal character. See the cognitive distortion there yet? Hint: it's called black and white thinking. Why don't you own that as it seems to be a reflection of your character?
There's not even objective evidence of what is being claimed. This is just the opinion of four people.
What you don't realize is that some belief systems that have been popular for thousands of years only need a crusty old book with no contemporary evidence to basically enslave all of the Western Europe for several centuries. We've come far as a culture but still very far from rational, it pains me to say. I think we'll eventually get there though.
Well, as they say, truth has a liberal bias, so if your search engine weights things that provide more credible factual information, and more credible factual information is associated with liberal news/information sources, what's the problem?
Oh but think of the poor people that were brought up in completely delusional belief systems and how much their feelings get hurt when they are confronted by reality. Have some compassion would you? Irrational, delusional people have feelings too.
Actually, the last version of Navigator - Netscape 9 - was a FireFox clone, before AOL killed it. It was suggested to go either to FireFox or Flake. I tried out the latter before that one went EOL as well.
I'm referring to Netscape 6 which was AOL's disaster and then Mozilla split back off from them and Netscape 7 became based on their Mozilla engine. Regarding Firefox, that name came about at the 1.0 release: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
AOL had merged w/ Time Warner at the height of the dotcom boom, but had split out again, which was probably when the internet service went dead. Wonder what they have beyond their web site. For the record, when Netscape was at its peak, during Netscape 4, I had joined Netcenter and so have a netscape.net email address, which I use to this day, using the AOL servers for IMAP and SMTP. Some of the mergers AOL was involved in did real damage. I just wish Netscape as a company had survived long enough to be eaten up by Google.
Ow my eyes. You're making me think of the Netscape browser we don't speak of that AOL ruined... it bears the mark of the beast.
The 80s? Really? Floppies where still going strong into the mid 90s, and AOL was known for their spamming of CDs. They died in the late 90s with those same disks.
Besides the historical inaccuracies... The point is valid. AOL is still around?
Ooh computer/internet history. Yes, the internet did not exist in the 80's. Well let me clarify the general public internet didn't exist. AOL 1.0 from what I recall arrived in 1994 and did indeed come on a single 3.5" floppy disk. Its competitors were Compuserve and Delphi. AOL had a leg up especially on Compuserve because it had a relatively rich application that ran on Windows 3.1 for a more user-friendly experience. However, you were stuck with their browser on their closed network and couldn't use Netscape Navigator or Mosaic (which Microsoft later purchased and turned into Internet Explorer). It wasn't until the late 90's when AOL began spamming their CD's and having shady recurring billing practices where they would often bill you long after you canceled. Oh and remember kids, it wasn't until the late 90's when broadband roamed the earth so this was all happening on boingy boingy dialup modems.
AOL, the internet service has been long dead. I'm not sure what their employees do. Sit around and play Minesweeper all day?
You're trying to understand it from the wrong point of view. Think of it from a marketing executive's POV...
Oh oh, I got this one! Marketing perspective: I have a product that I really couldn't care less about and you really have no need for but I'm going to convince you that you need it so that I can sell it to you and make commissions at your expense, suckers!
And by the time the investors figure out that those people don't have much disposable income, the current owners will have all cashed out.
Well well, you my friend hit the nail on the head for our economic woes in general. But you know keep pushing for that double digit growth year over year corporate America. W00t.
The only reason multi-threading is considered a hard problem is because people are grossly under-trained and overly optimistic. If you're just like "I want this to run asynchronously so it's not blocked and get more performance so I'll throw it in the thread pool" you are going to end up with nightmare code. Proper multi-threading that is high performance requires good orchestration of tasks much like an OS task scheduler. You also have to think in a parallel computing mindset. For example let's say I have a composite operation that consists of Task A, B and C but I don't care what order they finish. They way to do this is to have a structure that houses these tasks and when the last one completes there is a callback function that signals something else to continue onward processing. It's actually not that difficult but most people can't be bothered to learn how to do things like this properly.
Rather than create complete, cohesive games and charging a single price to play them, they design the games around having to buy stuff constantly to progress.
I don't agree the solution is to go back to stand-alone games. I like the new game model where a game is released and additional content is released at a price. These newer game engines allow games to evolve over time. The only reason to release a new stand alone game is if a new game engine is developed that is incompatible with the previous one.
What you are complaining about is "pay to win" games. Most of those games don't require you to pay for the additional content to enjoy the game. However, if you get hooked by the psychological drive to be competitive with other players then that's your fault. People need to take some personal responsibility for their own behavior. If you don't like this type of game or lack self control (check your ego), don't play it and don't let your kids play it. Simple as that. Don't ruin it for the others.
The GOP platform specifically states that it is against net neutrality
You know, net neutrality is not actually a partisan issue. It's been made to look that way so you don't consider who is really behind it. It's actually members of the US Chamber of Commerce like Comcast, AT&T and Time Warner that have lobbied the government. They'll influence anyone they think will favor their position to strong arm citizens into arrangements to pay them more money for their respective boards of directors.
Soda is fucking terrible for you. That's why I always make sure to dilute it with an equal part of rum or whiskey.
And in the blue corner we have a pair of kidneys! And in the red corner we have a liver! This is going to be a great contest folks! Let's get ready to RUUUUUBMLE!
The old saying "don't believe everything you hear/read/see" hasn't changed even in today's age of social media. If you don't fact check or correlate your sources and go around regurgitating everything you hear/read/see, you will get a collective consciousness not even remotely based in reality. This is a PEBKAC error not a Facebook problem.
Trump negotiating with Putin leads to Trump selling the whole farm and not even realizing it. Narcissist people like that can be manipulated by devious people like the KGB graduate Putin.
A real narcissist never gives anyone credit for anything. That would take the spotlight off of them. Trust me I've known a few. You don't know what a real narcissist is.
Slashdot Mirror
Wait - not everything on the Internet is true?
Only the stuff about aliens and the Illuminati is true, everything else is false.
Folks that can't stand reality conflicting with their hate-based fantasies.
What?! Everyone knows that if you keep shouting something over and over so no else can say anything it becomes reality, riiiight? It's similar to putting your fingers in your ears and saying "lalala I can't hear you". It's the magical secret sauce of the universe man. In fact, I think I'll go out in my backyard right now and incessantly yell as loud as I can, "The money tree shall come forth!" Anyone who comes by to call me crazy I'll just talk over them so they can't get a word in edge-wise and I will become RICH! Tee hee! Woo hoo!
I'm guessing the female participation in this study was also at 40%.
Nah, that 40% doesn't have sex anyway so they're not giving up anything. Profit!
Because it's about the trustworthyness of the election system- these calls aren't about changing this month's election results, they're about reliable future elections.
ZOMG, everyone knows the ENTIRE election system it out of date and doesn't reflect that state of the union as it existed 200 years ago. No one does anything about it. Are you going to do something about it? Furthermore, do you believe that our elections have always been accurate down to every last single vote. Think about that for a second. Do you think that's slanted in any particular candidate's favor, really?
You young whipper snappers are talking about this like it's a new thing. 16 years ago when the same EXACT thing happened between Al Gore and George W. Bush and the same exact call for a recount happened after Al Gore conceded: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.... That's the thing, Hillary ALREADY conceded. It's done and on the books. Why people keep ruminating about this is beyond me. Life goes on.
Both choices? Both? Seriously? There were states with more than 10 candidates on the ballot. I personally voted for Evan McMullen
Ok Mr./Mrs. Pedant calm down. Take a chill pill and come back down to reality. You're splitting hairs. There are two major political parties, Republican and Democrat. I'm pretty sure you're not stupid enough to not recognize that was implied. I did notice that Gary Johnson scored a record high popular vote for the Libertarian party but come on now. You're acting as if an independent political candidate has any realistic chance of winning a presidential election in the United States. Certain things we need to happen in order for the generally stupid American public to feel compelled to think outside the box. Have you ever bothered to look at the track record of independent candidates over history? So, what do you want to gripe about? That the American public is too stupid to realize they have other choices besides Red and Blue? Go right ahead but I'll tell you it's a complete waste of time and energy and you only get so much in this life.
If you're really that butt hurt over it and you really want to change things, organize a grass roots campaign to change American politics. Ranting and raving on Slashdot isn't going to do a damn thing except possibly get you all worked up to the point that you have a heart attack. Geesh.
Don't be a pussy and try to distance yourself from his extremism. Own it.
Both choices for president were very flawed in different ways. Your logic is that if you support either candidate that their flaws reflect on the voter's personal character. See the cognitive distortion there yet? Hint: it's called black and white thinking. Why don't you own that as it seems to be a reflection of your character?
There's not even objective evidence of what is being claimed. This is just the opinion of four people.
What you don't realize is that some belief systems that have been popular for thousands of years only need a crusty old book with no contemporary evidence to basically enslave all of the Western Europe for several centuries. We've come far as a culture but still very far from rational, it pains me to say. I think we'll eventually get there though.
Well, as they say, truth has a liberal bias, so if your search engine weights things that provide more credible factual information, and more credible factual information is associated with liberal news/information sources, what's the problem?
Oh but think of the poor people that were brought up in completely delusional belief systems and how much their feelings get hurt when they are confronted by reality. Have some compassion would you? Irrational, delusional people have feelings too.
Actually, the last version of Navigator - Netscape 9 - was a FireFox clone, before AOL killed it. It was suggested to go either to FireFox or Flake. I tried out the latter before that one went EOL as well.
I'm referring to Netscape 6 which was AOL's disaster and then Mozilla split back off from them and Netscape 7 became based on their Mozilla engine. Regarding Firefox, that name came about at the 1.0 release: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
AOL had merged w/ Time Warner at the height of the dotcom boom, but had split out again, which was probably when the internet service went dead. Wonder what they have beyond their web site. For the record, when Netscape was at its peak, during Netscape 4, I had joined Netcenter and so have a netscape.net email address, which I use to this day, using the AOL servers for IMAP and SMTP. Some of the mergers AOL was involved in did real damage. I just wish Netscape as a company had survived long enough to be eaten up by Google.
Ow my eyes. You're making me think of the Netscape browser we don't speak of that AOL ruined... it bears the mark of the beast.
The 80s? Really? Floppies where still going strong into the mid 90s, and AOL was known for their spamming of CDs. They died in the late 90s with those same disks.
Besides the historical inaccuracies... The point is valid. AOL is still around?
Ooh computer/internet history. Yes, the internet did not exist in the 80's. Well let me clarify the general public internet didn't exist. AOL 1.0 from what I recall arrived in 1994 and did indeed come on a single 3.5" floppy disk. Its competitors were Compuserve and Delphi. AOL had a leg up especially on Compuserve because it had a relatively rich application that ran on Windows 3.1 for a more user-friendly experience. However, you were stuck with their browser on their closed network and couldn't use Netscape Navigator or Mosaic (which Microsoft later purchased and turned into Internet Explorer). It wasn't until the late 90's when AOL began spamming their CD's and having shady recurring billing practices where they would often bill you long after you canceled. Oh and remember kids, it wasn't until the late 90's when broadband roamed the earth so this was all happening on boingy boingy dialup modems.
AOL, the internet service has been long dead. I'm not sure what their employees do. Sit around and play Minesweeper all day?
Too Many Secrets: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
You're trying to understand it from the wrong point of view. Think of it from a marketing executive's POV...
Oh oh, I got this one! Marketing perspective: I have a product that I really couldn't care less about and you really have no need for but I'm going to convince you that you need it so that I can sell it to you and make commissions at your expense, suckers!
And by the time the investors figure out that those people don't have much disposable income, the current owners will have all cashed out.
Well well, you my friend hit the nail on the head for our economic woes in general. But you know keep pushing for that double digit growth year over year corporate America. W00t.
The only reason multi-threading is considered a hard problem is because people are grossly under-trained and overly optimistic. If you're just like "I want this to run asynchronously so it's not blocked and get more performance so I'll throw it in the thread pool" you are going to end up with nightmare code. Proper multi-threading that is high performance requires good orchestration of tasks much like an OS task scheduler. You also have to think in a parallel computing mindset. For example let's say I have a composite operation that consists of Task A, B and C but I don't care what order they finish. They way to do this is to have a structure that houses these tasks and when the last one completes there is a callback function that signals something else to continue onward processing. It's actually not that difficult but most people can't be bothered to learn how to do things like this properly.
Arbitrary truncation of data...
640k oughta be enough for anyone
1 who's my customer 2 What does he or she actually want.
Sadly this is a problem that is NP, therefore we must solve P vs NP to satisfy it.
I wonder if this is why I seem to have much worse allergies over the past 10-15 years, more weeds. A win for Flonase I suppose.
FTFY. These games are designed to be as frustrating / time-consuming as possible.
Sorry but that's a personal preference. Some people like grind games. Have you played Kittens game or Cookie Clicker?
Rather than create complete, cohesive games and charging a single price to play them, they design the games around having to buy stuff constantly to progress.
I don't agree the solution is to go back to stand-alone games. I like the new game model where a game is released and additional content is released at a price. These newer game engines allow games to evolve over time. The only reason to release a new stand alone game is if a new game engine is developed that is incompatible with the previous one.
What you are complaining about is "pay to win" games. Most of those games don't require you to pay for the additional content to enjoy the game. However, if you get hooked by the psychological drive to be competitive with other players then that's your fault. People need to take some personal responsibility for their own behavior. If you don't like this type of game or lack self control (check your ego), don't play it and don't let your kids play it. Simple as that. Don't ruin it for the others.
The GOP platform specifically states that it is against net neutrality
You know, net neutrality is not actually a partisan issue. It's been made to look that way so you don't consider who is really behind it. It's actually members of the US Chamber of Commerce like Comcast, AT&T and Time Warner that have lobbied the government. They'll influence anyone they think will favor their position to strong arm citizens into arrangements to pay them more money for their respective boards of directors.
Soda is fucking terrible for you. That's why I always make sure to dilute it with an equal part of rum or whiskey.
And in the blue corner we have a pair of kidneys! And in the red corner we have a liver! This is going to be a great contest folks! Let's get ready to RUUUUUBMLE!
The old saying "don't believe everything you hear/read/see" hasn't changed even in today's age of social media. If you don't fact check or correlate your sources and go around regurgitating everything you hear/read/see, you will get a collective consciousness not even remotely based in reality. This is a PEBKAC error not a Facebook problem.
Trump negotiating with Putin leads to Trump selling the whole farm and not even realizing it. Narcissist people like that can be manipulated by devious people like the KGB graduate Putin.
A real narcissist never gives anyone credit for anything. That would take the spotlight off of them. Trust me I've known a few. You don't know what a real narcissist is.