Here are few links:
Philadelphia Inquirer, UPI (Two quotes: "Ghostwriters paid by U.S. pharmaceutical giant Wyeth worked on dozens of articles published in medical journals under doctors' names, court documents indicate." and "A Wyeth spokesman said the ghostwritten articles were scientifically sound and subject to peer review by the journals that published them.") NYT
Honesty is the key. A lot of people will disagree with me there, but if you can't be honest to your effing partner, with whom can you ever be honest then?
Exactly. So when a husband sleeps with someone, he should tell his wife about it. Same goes for the wife. Honesty is the key.
Reminds me of the tongue-in-cheek story about how, upon receiving a rejection letter from a company, the applicant sent them back a letter regretfully rejecting their rejection, and that he'd therefore be starting employment with them the following week.
This reminds me of Woody Allen's "Take The Money and Run" where in one episode there is a job interview during which interviewee at one point starts asking the interviewer questions, and after he couldn't answer several of them, the interviewee takes him to the door with best of wishes in his search for a new job.
The scheme would make sense in some situations now that I think more about it:D
We're maybe one step away from from that -- "Today, sue school for not finding me a job. Tomorrow, sue company itself for rejecting me and hurting my self-esteem!"
A paradox: If he is willing to sue the company, does that not prove that his self-esteem has not been damaged?
In an ideal world we would all have 365 paid days a year off.
Back on the planet Earth, however, things are different than in this strange "ideal" world.
Obviously a balance must be struck between what's best for the worker and what's best for the business. [emphasize added]
Why is that obvious? Your formulation again presupposes an ideal world of workers and business living and working in harmony, but, and that is the question, who would be in this happy get-together deciding on the number of days-off?
We may disagree on what that balance is, but sometimes it is indeed more beneficial (in the bigger picture) to have less days off than more.
Questions here only pile one upon another:
More beneficial for whom? Which bigger picture? If the number of days off is relative, that means only one thing: that there is no predefined ideal or absolute number of days with respect to which one could determine the length of vacation.
What does it then even mean to talk about more or less days? More or less than what?
Just pointing out that it's all relative. One man's "You're working too hard" is another man's "What a bunch of lazy-asses!" Just because Europe has the world's most generous policy toward laborers doesn't necessarily make it the best, and certainly not only, system out there.
You mean: sometimes it is better to have less days off than, um, more.
If we are laughing at "ATM machine" or "PIN number" or "RTFA the farking article", we are not laughing at you. Your whole theory is that the workings of the brain w.r.t language are to be interpreted through a working of a child's brain and not adults, because the language of adults is already contaminated with degenerate sexual filth, which you undertake to expose as such out of nowhere, or to be precise, your explanations are additionally supplanted with sexual analogies. Examples are abundant.
In my own notes, I tend to write out the redundant noun, because in this form I read it faster, even though it makes me gag every time. I'm just not wired to shave 1% in comprehension speed for a 100% gain in elegance.
Some people prefer to shave so that it looks prettier and they don't gag. It does not threaten me.
the formal definitions of psychology are:
- applied science
- theoretical / formal science
- and has roots in the humanities.
(I apologise for the language barrier - it might not be technically accurate for the english language)
blabbering that psychology[...]
You sure do know what to blabber means: first you apologize for you poor ability to express what you want to say, and, I'll be frank here, these "formal definitions" that you are talking about make no sense whatsoever, then you quickly proceed to accuse all of those who you perceive to be against of whatever you are defending here of blabbering.
Aside from Copy on Write, one other feature that this filesystem has that I would consider essential in a modern filesystem is full checksumming. As drives get larger and larger, the chance of a random undetected error on write increases and having full checksums on every block of data that gets written to the drive means that when something is written, I know it's written. It also means that when I read something back from the disk, I know that it was the data that was put there and didn't get silently corrupted by the [sata controller | dodgy cable | cosmic rays] on the way to the disk and back.
VI simply does not have as many functions dealing with text, it simply is not as powerful in this regard.
Nothing has as many functions and options as emacs, and vi is no exception.
And what if you need to write a custom text alteration method for use in a maco? That's a few lines of code in Emacs, and impossible in VI.
It's possible and I've done it: you don't try to make one big all-encompassing macro, but two: the first one does operations before the text alteration, then you do the custom text altering using ordinary commands, then apply the second one which does the rest of operations.
In vi, I don't write macros, I just do the editing and then repeat the same editing sequence again, by pressing "dot", or, in more complicated editing sequences, thinly wrapped with three keystrokes that define the macro. Actually, I'd say less than three, since I often do it by: qq<editing>q. In emacs, I'm sure you can do more things by writing a macro in some semi-exotic situations at the expense of having more things to learn/do/remember. In these situations, I'd rather put some effort in cleverly combining things I know to get the editing done, without any line of (macro) code written.
I think the choice between emacs and vi, and I must say I know noone who uses both, is a matter of taste and preferences, or, perhaps, philosophy.
For short repetitive tasks, there's simply nothing more useful than the macro recording mode that lets you execute a combination of searches, multiple buffer stores, and cursor position storage states to easily repeat very complex tasks over a block of code.
Slashdot Mirror
Here are few links:
Philadelphia Inquirer,
UPI (Two quotes: "Ghostwriters paid by U.S. pharmaceutical giant Wyeth worked on dozens of articles published in medical journals under doctors' names, court documents indicate." and "A Wyeth spokesman said the ghostwritten articles were scientifically sound and subject to peer review by the journals that published them.")
NYT
TFA is unreachable...
Honesty is the key. A lot of people will disagree with me there, but if you can't be honest to your effing partner, with whom can you ever be honest then?
Exactly. So when a husband sleeps with someone, he should tell his wife about it. Same goes for the wife. Honesty is the key.
[...] And the eight and final rule: if this is your first advice seeking on slashdot, you have to follow the advice.
not socially intelligent or successful at all he was scary (aggressive drinking manipulative).
You have to be socially intelligent to be successfully manipulative.
He was obviously not successful (unless "scary (agressive drinking manipulative)" means "successfully manipulative").
Concentrate on enjoying each other's company. Enjoy being with each other. Stop trying to analyse the hell out of it and just ENJOY it :)
But how can I do that doc, I feel so GUILTY when I try it?
We call that Freudian slip. Yes, it's sexual.
No problemo, we call that Freudian slip. Yes, it's sexual.
Then "NLP training" must be Neural Linguistic Programming training?
I suggest some NLP training[...]
What's NLP?
Reminds me of the tongue-in-cheek story about how, upon receiving a rejection letter from a company, the applicant sent them back a letter regretfully rejecting their rejection, and that he'd therefore be starting employment with them the following week.
This reminds me of Woody Allen's "Take The Money and Run" where in one episode there is a job interview during which interviewee at one point starts asking the interviewer questions, and after he couldn't answer several of them, the interviewee takes him to the door with best of wishes in his search for a new job.
:D
The scheme would make sense in some situations now that I think more about it
We're maybe one step away from from that -- "Today, sue school for not finding me a job. Tomorrow, sue company itself for rejecting me and hurting my self-esteem!"
A paradox: If he is willing to sue the company, does that not prove that his self-esteem has not been damaged?
In an ideal world we would all have 365 paid days a year off.
Back on the planet Earth, however, things are different than in this strange "ideal" world.
Obviously a balance must be struck between what's best for the worker and what's best for the business. [emphasize added]
Why is that obvious? Your formulation again presupposes an ideal world of workers and business living and working in harmony, but, and that is the question, who would be in this happy get-together deciding on the number of days-off?
We may disagree on what that balance is, but sometimes it is indeed more beneficial (in the bigger picture) to have less days off than more.
Questions here only pile one upon another: More beneficial for whom? Which bigger picture? If the number of days off is relative, that means only one thing: that there is no predefined ideal or absolute number of days with respect to which one could determine the length of vacation. What does it then even mean to talk about more or less days? More or less than what?
Just pointing out that it's all relative. One man's "You're working too hard" is another man's "What a bunch of lazy-asses!" Just because Europe has the world's most generous policy toward laborers doesn't necessarily make it the best, and certainly not only, system out there.
You mean: sometimes it is better to have less days off than, um, more.
In my own notes, I tend to write out the redundant noun, because in this form I read it faster, even though it makes me gag every time. I'm just not wired to shave 1% in comprehension speed for a 100% gain in elegance.
Some people prefer to shave so that it looks prettier and they don't gag. It does not threaten me.
>>I think there is a plan behind it.
>I think you're interpreting things, and there is no need to do that according to the deeply insightful GP:
Actually, he was being funny. Read it again.
Potentially, funny. Actually, he is modded +5 Insightful. That's funny. No need to read it again.
I think there is a plan behind it.
I think you're interpreting things, and there is no need to do that according to the deeply insightful GP:
There isn't any needed for interpretation, it's literally 1984.
It's literally 1984 really, no need to interpret anything. Ok?
the formal definitions of psychology are: - applied science - theoretical / formal science - and has roots in the humanities. (I apologise for the language barrier - it might not be technically accurate for the english language)
blabbering that psychology[...]
You sure do know what to blabber means: first you apologize for you poor ability to express what you want to say, and, I'll be frank here, these "formal definitions" that you are talking about make no sense whatsoever, then you quickly proceed to accuse all of those who you perceive to be against of whatever you are defending here of blabbering.
You made up that quote, didn't you?
Now why don't you lay down and relax, and tell me more about your father.
This Feyman's "I know what it means to know something" is a true gem of boundless wisdom.
[...]why I prefer Linux over *BSD or Solaris:
[...]
- better hw support
[...]
To you then file system is not something that supports hardware!?
Aside from Copy on Write, one other feature that this filesystem has that I would consider essential in a modern filesystem is full checksumming. As drives get larger and larger, the chance of a random undetected error on write increases and having full checksums on every block of data that gets written to the drive means that when something is written, I know it's written. It also means that when I read something back from the disk, I know that it was the data that was put there and didn't get silently corrupted by the [sata controller | dodgy cable | cosmic rays] on the way to the disk and back.
You mean like ZFS does it?
That argument isn't actually based on the technical merits, and thus doesn't make any sense..
So what's your point? that ext4 is better than ZFS on technical merits!?
VI simply does not have as many functions dealing with text, it simply is not as powerful in this regard.
Nothing has as many functions and options as emacs, and vi is no exception.
And what if you need to write a custom text alteration method for use in a maco? That's a few lines of code in Emacs, and impossible in VI.
It's possible and I've done it: you don't try to make one big all-encompassing macro, but two: the first one does operations before the text alteration, then you do the custom text altering using ordinary commands, then apply the second one which does the rest of operations.
In vi, I don't write macros, I just do the editing and then repeat the same editing sequence again, by pressing "dot", or, in more complicated editing sequences, thinly wrapped with three keystrokes that define the macro. Actually, I'd say less than three, since I often do it by: qq<editing>q. In emacs, I'm sure you can do more things by writing a macro in some semi-exotic situations at the expense of having more things to learn/do/remember. In these situations, I'd rather put some effort in cleverly combining things I know to get the editing done, without any line of (macro) code written.
I think the choice between emacs and vi, and I must say I know noone who uses both, is a matter of taste and preferences, or, perhaps, philosophy.
For short repetitive tasks, there's simply nothing more useful than the macro recording mode that lets you execute a combination of searches, multiple buffer stores, and cursor position storage states to easily repeat very complex tasks over a block of code.
That's easily done, you know, also in vi.
Sharks man, freaking sharks.
Exactly. The next evolutionary level: sharks with laser-beams.