If I leave my house unlocked, and someone goes in and take things without my permission, they are still guilty of theft. The fact that it was easy doesn't make it right. From a practical point of view, I am being stupid, but from a legal point of view I am in the right.
The point is: Should you take responsibility for your own security, or just assume the police/insurance company etc. will do it for everybody?
Does the police have unlimited resources and catch all thieves, returning all stolen goods to their rightful owners? Only in Utopia.
Do the insurance companies have unlimited amounts of money to shell out to people who practically invite criminals to their stuff? Only in Utopia. In fact, most insurance companies have clauses for how you should protect the insured stuff.
Yes, it's theft whether it was easy or not. But people who think everyone else are nice still lose their stuff. There are a fraction of "borderline" criminals who will steal it if it's easy and not if it's hard (locked in). Why would you reduce your security by the "amount" they represent?
Its so mired in ridiculous class hierarchies that it is confusing how to get simple things done.
In what way do you find them confusing? IO-streams which wrap nicely. Swing using MVC to separate the data models from the presentation. Networking and threading in the blink of an eye. Much simpler than in most other languages.
Unless all you do is shell programming and text manipulation, of course, but for that, too, there are libraries.
No, alcohol kills more than pot because it's actually poisonous. Ask the people behind the recent French medical report which classified drugs in three categories based on their danger:
Most dangerous: Alcohol, heroin, cocaine.
Less dangerous: Nicrotine tobacco, LSD, MDMA ("Ecstasy")
Least dangerous: Cannabis
Put that in your pipe and smoke it, it will be less dangerous than put what you use in your glass and drink it.:-)
Hey all you ACs, you are a bunch of typical lazy shitheads who enjoys the benefits of all who have served their country and even sacrificed their lives.
That was then, this is now: Did USA come to East Timor's aid when Indonesia invaded? Nope. Would they have given a rat's ass about Kuwait if Kuwait didn't have a lot of oil? Nope.
Weapon technology is often sold to all sides in a conflict, and your precious army is sent in to protect commercial interests. War is no longer some "serve the country" thing, it's serve the buck.
But, hey, just buy the propaganda that what happened fifty years ago has any relevance when it comes to today's military apparatus. The only people profiting from today's wars are the arms merchants who get to replenish the bombs wasted on e.g. Yugoslavia, with no responsibility for the civilian lives taken by their cluster bombs going off long ater. They just count the dollars the governments are more than willing to spend.
Um, Java is a "compiled language such as C++". Are you sure you're not thinking of the totally unrelated Javascript?
C++ had it's day, and people are thankfully waking up to the realization it's an ugly beast, and choose productive languages like Java or Smalltalk instead.
... but a lot of people got scared, and probably still are. I still wonder why people som easily believe the negative scientific reports, but ignore the positive...
1) Do you live near power lines? Would you want people to stop using electrical power because there may be a link between magnetic fields induced by these and birth defects?
2) How about powerful radio transmitters?
3) The Earth has a natural ground emission of approx. 1 milli-Sievert - do you intend to move to a less radioactive piece of rock?
Simple: if MS gets to 90% share for IE they will be in a position to cut the Linux blood flow - the Internet.
Joining the "Internet equals web" community does not add credibility yo your arguments. The Internet existed before Microsoft got networking into their excuse for an OS, and will exist after the Web turns into yet another entertainment product for the masses.
but HTML4.0's lack of default still cramps my style.
That different browsers should be allowed to render HTML in different ways is a core concept. If you wanted complete control, you should have used Adobe Acrobat.
Various Turbo Pascal-written tools using the Turbo Tools package for DOS-based windowing used it for moving the windows, IIRC: By enabling scroll lock, the arrow keys could be used to move the window on the screen, and possibly change its size (it's been a while since I used it).
As did Sidekick, by the way.
Re:Any chance of getting that into Emacs/Xemacs?
on
Changing the Keyboard
·
· Score: 1
Of course, as a side-effect you turn off the normal association of M-up and M-down: Scrolling the "other window". Personally, I use that more often than the need to scroll the current window one line at a time.
Different contries have different ages of sexual concent.
Not to mention that the age of (sexual) consent is relatively modern concept; Case in point, if I remember my recent history correctly: When Jerry Lee Lewis wanted to marry his thirteen-year old cousin, lots of anti-rocker-folks jumped at him, because it had to be illegal. Nope, the state did not have a law about age of consent.
The key issue remains the same: Underestimating or dismissing future needs. At some point, a 16 MHz PC/AT had excessive CPU power for most common VisiCalc spreadsheets.
No shit! Why the hell should I support some pregnant woman.
True, there is someone else who should instead: The fucking (pun intended) father.
That's what all those stupid politicans (including Jesse Ven-DUH-ra) who attack single mothers forget: There is a male prick in the picture, but who has run away from his half of the responsibility, like a little criminal.
Slightly off-topic, but I sometimes get pissed at certain elements of my half of the population.
It doesn't matter how many thousands of emails you got from CHILDREN. They are still children. They are still the responsibility of their parents. They are NOT adults nor have the achieved the maturity necessary for the decisions on what is good or bad for them.
You just fail to get it, do you? The things a parent needs to protect their kid against are certain parts of Real Life, not some fictious entertainment. There isn't an usher asking the teenager for an ID when he gets a dose of cocaine from a street dealer.
What's the message you're trying to give? "Kids, you can live 'American Pie', you just can't watch it on a screen"? It's okay for Little Jill to learn about sex in the backseat of Horny Jack's car, but she cannot watch Cruise and Kidman have some in a theatre?
All this "protect the children" bullshit are strawmen thrown up by sensation-hungry media and control freaks who make no effort to teach children right from wrong, they just try to remove as much "wrong" from the movies etc. that kids can get at, and foolishly believe this will lead to only "good" influences getting to the kids.
Since the names are more or less influenced by amount of media coverage, RMS cannot win. Linus' name has been far more present in mainstream media than that of the man in the high castle.:-)
Slashdot Mirror
No. Should the driver be held partially responsible for "helping" the car thief steal his car? Yes, as most insurance companies will tell you.
The point is: Should you take responsibility for your own security, or just assume the police/insurance company etc. will do it for everybody?
Does the police have unlimited resources and catch all thieves, returning all stolen goods to their rightful owners? Only in Utopia.
Do the insurance companies have unlimited amounts of money to shell out to people who practically invite criminals to their stuff? Only in Utopia. In fact, most insurance companies have clauses for how you should protect the insured stuff.
Yes, it's theft whether it was easy or not. But people who think everyone else are nice still lose their stuff. There are a fraction of "borderline" criminals who will steal it if it's easy and not if it's hard (locked in). Why would you reduce your security by the "amount" they represent?
In what way do you find them confusing? IO-streams which wrap nicely. Swing using MVC to separate the data models from the presentation. Networking and threading in the blink of an eye. Much simpler than in most other languages.
Unless all you do is shell programming and text manipulation, of course, but for that, too, there are libraries.
That's the "Microsoft-backed ActtiveState port" Perl, yes? :-)
No, alcohol kills more than pot because it's actually poisonous. Ask the people behind the recent French medical report which classified drugs in three categories based on their danger:
Put that in your pipe and smoke it, it will be less dangerous than put what you use in your glass and drink it. :-)
That was then, this is now: Did USA come to East Timor's aid when Indonesia invaded? Nope. Would they have given a rat's ass about Kuwait if Kuwait didn't have a lot of oil? Nope.
Weapon technology is often sold to all sides in a conflict, and your precious army is sent in to protect commercial interests. War is no longer some "serve the country" thing, it's serve the buck.
But, hey, just buy the propaganda that what happened fifty years ago has any relevance when it comes to today's military apparatus. The only people profiting from today's wars are the arms merchants who get to replenish the bombs wasted on e.g. Yugoslavia, with no responsibility for the civilian lives taken by their cluster bombs going off long ater. They just count the dollars the governments are more than willing to spend.
Um, Java is a "compiled language such as C++". Are you sure you're not thinking of the totally unrelated Javascript?
C++ had it's day, and people are thankfully waking up to the realization it's an ugly beast, and choose productive languages like Java or Smalltalk instead.
Not "games", but "game". A game. Solitaire.
(Yes', I've known office clerks who have spent many hours playing Solitaire.)
... but a lot of people got scared, and probably still are. I still wonder why people som easily believe the negative scientific reports, but ignore the positive...
1) Do you live near power lines? Would you want people to stop using electrical power because there may be a link between magnetic fields induced by these and birth defects?
2) How about powerful radio transmitters?
3) The Earth has a natural ground emission of approx. 1 milli-Sievert - do you intend to move to a less radioactive piece of rock?
Your reply is just techno-phobe insanity.
Heh. Herbert West, MCSE, coming soon to a Windows Media Player near you. :-)
Joining the "Internet equals web" community does not add credibility yo your arguments. The Internet existed before Microsoft got networking into their excuse for an OS, and will exist after the Web turns into yet another entertainment product for the masses.
This flies in the face of the fact that MSIE 5 fails at more of the CSS1 tests than e.g. Opera does.
That different browsers should be allowed to render HTML in different ways is a core concept. If you wanted complete control, you should have used Adobe Acrobat.
Unless you count the Kennedys. :-P
Various Turbo Pascal-written tools using the Turbo Tools package for DOS-based windowing used it for moving the windows, IIRC: By enabling scroll lock, the arrow keys could be used to move the window on the screen, and possibly change its size (it's been a while since I used it).
As did Sidekick, by the way.
Of course, as a side-effect you turn off the normal association of M-up and M-down: Scrolling the "other window". Personally, I use that more often than the need to scroll the current window one line at a time.
Not to mention that the age of (sexual) consent is relatively modern concept; Case in point, if I remember my recent history correctly: When Jerry Lee Lewis wanted to marry his thirteen-year old cousin, lots of anti-rocker-folks jumped at him, because it had to be illegal. Nope, the state did not have a law about age of consent.
Yes, especially the part of the drug industry the CIA used to finance the rebels in Nicaragua... :-P
I think he meant Sweden, where (AFAIK) possession is still legal, but distribution is not.
There is also the wavering line between where "simply nude" ends and "erotic" begins... Photographs of nudes are not illegal.
The key issue remains the same: Underestimating or dismissing future needs. At some point, a 16 MHz PC/AT had excessive CPU power for most common VisiCalc spreadsheets.
True, there is someone else who should instead: The fucking (pun intended) father.
That's what all those stupid politicans (including Jesse Ven-DUH-ra) who attack single mothers forget: There is a male prick in the picture, but who has run away from his half of the responsibility, like a little criminal.
Slightly off-topic, but I sometimes get pissed at certain elements of my half of the population.
You just fail to get it, do you? The things a parent needs to protect their kid against are certain parts of Real Life, not some fictious entertainment. There isn't an usher asking the teenager for an ID when he gets a dose of cocaine from a street dealer.
What's the message you're trying to give? "Kids, you can live 'American Pie', you just can't watch it on a screen"? It's okay for Little Jill to learn about sex in the backseat of Horny Jack's car, but she cannot watch Cruise and Kidman have some in a theatre?
All this "protect the children" bullshit are strawmen thrown up by sensation-hungry media and control freaks who make no effort to teach children right from wrong, they just try to remove as much "wrong" from the movies etc. that kids can get at, and foolishly believe this will lead to only "good" influences getting to the kids.
Of course, "neo" meant "new" long before The Matrix, but let's not get bogged down by details... :-)
Since the names are more or less influenced by amount of media coverage, RMS cannot win. Linus' name has been far more present in mainstream media than that of the man in the high castle. :-)