It certainly can be. Tons of numbers to enter manually if you've got any sort of capital gains, all of which have to be printed on their own line. Some things may be easy to overlook if a program isn't reminding you. I used to do my own taxes when they were simpler, but over time it's gotten harder and the detailed IRS instructions are not straight forward flowcharts.
Exactly. I know several people who's primary posts on google+ are to complain about their job. That's not the sort of thing smart people would want to make public.
It goes up and down over time. Was more active last year than now, and much of what I see is communities or the "what's hot" (which I need to turn off, that political fight has gone non stop since the election, despite being nearly non-existent before the election). But at this point there is no alternative really.
Don't forget, Google forced Google+ users to join Youtube. From my view, Youtube was the stinky cheese we didn't order with our meal. A lot of us joined Google+ without having even on other Google service linked to it.
Please stoop making Google+ your whipping boy when the fault is with "Google". If you hate Google+ but love Youtube, then maybe you're not seeing the common parent they both have?
What does Facebook do? I don't really understand the hatred for G+ given that this policy has already been changed for some time now, and that facebook had a similar policy.
I signed up voluntarily, and at the time there was little to no push to force unwanted services like gmail or youtube on us. That came later, so it's hard to say that's how its life started. Maybe it's how you heard of it but that's a different story.
And it pretty much is active there. I don't know what FB is like, probably never will, but it's certainly not dead. And I find troubling the idea that "9%" is equated to "almost nobody".
Sure, I'll admit that a lot of the updates are coming from reposts from other services (it makes sense actually, I can't believe G+ people are dumb enough to post some of that stuff).
There are indeed libraries for a lot of the optional Python data structures, they're not always built in. For example priority queues (heapq.py in the library), which are a pretty standard data structure taught in courses.
The pointers are implicit in python in that assignments are by reference. References are essentially the same as pointers anyway for what matters here. You absolutely can implement trees in a straight forward manner in Python, it's done by Python itself in a few cases in the library, and google pops up lots of examples. And it's easy to understand code too, probably suitable for intro class or even an advanced class that's dealing with rebalancing.
They didn't pull it out their ass. This same conjecture was spread quite far before the Slashdot post appeared. However most of these earlier stories that I rechecked have been revised. I think someone got the story wrong initially, then lots of other tech sites copied and pasted some ambiguous conjecture and it spread quite far. Later it got cleared up but by then the Slashdot story was in the pipeline.
The phrasing "indicating Windows would be software that users subscribe too" appeared in quite a few articles.
A lot of early news reports said the same thing, so many that I think they all copied from some primary source. On going back again later I see that most have been edited, some with annotations that edits were made after initial publication.
Going to the Microsoft blog about this it seems less ambiguous, and that it's not implying a subscription. However I wonder if the original blog was edited after first release or not? Or at least what was the first site to make the mistake which then everyone else copied.
I distinctly remember first seeing this and thinking it was very odd, then quickly checking several other sides that had popped up on social media and seeing the same ambiguity and even the same phrasing.
Most of the news reports out there stated this very ambiguously and were conjecturing that this meant that subscription would be used. This includes big sites like the BBC. But I don't see this anymore, a lot of web sites have edited themselves since the initial announcements.
So this is not a Slashdot disinformation plan, if true it is a mistake that was made by many and a very easy mistake to make given the wording in the early reports.
Windows 8 wasn't free though, though it was initially offered at a very low price for those who recently purchased a new machine that had an older version of Windows pre-installed.
If Office license expires you can still do something with your computer though I presume. What happens if Windows expires?
As for the revolt, most Office users buying new copies are corporations, and corporate IT has never said no to Microsoft. Home users however tend to not upgrade yearly. So revolts from them are harder to see, they'll just stick with the latest version they have rather than upgrade.
Only simplistic versions that uses the cloud. Not so handy if you don't have broadband either. I'll use a real program any day over a dumbed down web app.
Yes this is pretty stupid and they should be able to foresee the revolt. As in loudly advertising "Free", which is in all the headlines, only to provide a product that is distinctly not free (in either meaning).
Possibly. But remember that the "false" is still an opinion. Thus it will be misused tremendously. Better to just flag as "overrated" if too many people found it "informative", or add a comment directly.
Technically it is a fact that the Bible says those things. The biggest Bible thumpers tend to repeat verses rather than just stating opinions as facts, because it emphasizes the authority of the Bible. Such as, "It says in Genesis that God created the heavens and the earth", which is a provably true statement even though is proposes something that is not provable.
From the applications world, the order of the day is often to get stuff done fast so that it ships. That often leads to a bad feeling from systems level programmers when they see "typical" application code. I like templates myself, when used sparingly, but have seen it misused and tortured so many times and systems bloated needlessly.
Systems programming generally wants to have control; details are important, speed and size are important, and there can't be any magic happening behind the scenes that the programmers don't know about. This is where things tend to fall down with some higher level features.
For example, exceptions. C++ does this behind the scenes. Unlike setjmp/longjmp in C you can't override what exceptions do, you have no API hooks to implement them yourself or tweak them. So the programmer is forced to work around the compiler in many instances, making sure that their fiddling with the registers isn't going to break exceptions or that an assembler routine screws it all up. And different C++ compilers will implement exceptions different, which is a bit of a hassle if you want to be portable across compilers. Finally the exceptions do cause noticable changes in performance (either speed or size, occasionally both).
But it's certainly possible to use a subset of C++ in systems level programming, but it gets harder and harder the more extra features that get brought in, especially anything that requires specialized runtime support. There are even specific subsets people have defined, like Embedded C++. With D I think it gets used ok here because there's just not as much concern about portability across compilers, but you still have to deal with runtime library overhead for some features and possible space/time tradeoffs.
"Most of the power" is just a poorly chosen but common phrase. If a language is Turing complete then it has all of the power. What is really meant there is "most of the features the author likes".
There was a safe in the Thief reboot game, and nearby was a note that read "I've tried every number combination from 0-0-0 all the way up to 6-7-2. I give up."
Slashdot Mirror
Though I have no idea why blended fibers was banned by the Bible.
A preemptive strike against leisure suits.
Those people with no preconceived positions may be the ones most likely to be influenced by the large bags of cash showing up in their mail.
It certainly can be. Tons of numbers to enter manually if you've got any sort of capital gains, all of which have to be printed on their own line. Some things may be easy to overlook if a program isn't reminding you. I used to do my own taxes when they were simpler, but over time it's gotten harder and the detailed IRS instructions are not straight forward flowcharts.
Exactly. I know several people who's primary posts on google+ are to complain about their job. That's not the sort of thing smart people would want to make public.
It goes up and down over time. Was more active last year than now, and much of what I see is communities or the "what's hot" (which I need to turn off, that political fight has gone non stop since the election, despite being nearly non-existent before the election). But at this point there is no alternative really.
Don't forget, Google forced Google+ users to join Youtube. From my view, Youtube was the stinky cheese we didn't order with our meal. A lot of us joined Google+ without having even on other Google service linked to it.
Please stoop making Google+ your whipping boy when the fault is with "Google". If you hate Google+ but love Youtube, then maybe you're not seeing the common parent they both have?
What does Facebook do? I don't really understand the hatred for G+ given that this policy has already been changed for some time now, and that facebook had a similar policy.
I signed up voluntarily, and at the time there was little to no push to force unwanted services like gmail or youtube on us. That came later, so it's hard to say that's how its life started. Maybe it's how you heard of it but that's a different story.
And it pretty much is active there. I don't know what FB is like, probably never will, but it's certainly not dead. And I find troubling the idea that "9%" is equated to "almost nobody".
Sure, I'll admit that a lot of the updates are coming from reposts from other services (it makes sense actually, I can't believe G+ people are dumb enough to post some of that stuff).
There are indeed libraries for a lot of the optional Python data structures, they're not always built in. For example priority queues (heapq.py in the library), which are a pretty standard data structure taught in courses.
The pointers are implicit in python in that assignments are by reference. References are essentially the same as pointers anyway for what matters here. You absolutely can implement trees in a straight forward manner in Python, it's done by Python itself in a few cases in the library, and google pops up lots of examples. And it's easy to understand code too, probably suitable for intro class or even an advanced class that's dealing with rebalancing.
They didn't pull it out their ass. This same conjecture was spread quite far before the Slashdot post appeared. However most of these earlier stories that I rechecked have been revised. I think someone got the story wrong initially, then lots of other tech sites copied and pasted some ambiguous conjecture and it spread quite far. Later it got cleared up but by then the Slashdot story was in the pipeline.
The phrasing "indicating Windows would be software that users subscribe too" appeared in quite a few articles.
A lot of early news reports said the same thing, so many that I think they all copied from some primary source. On going back again later I see that most have been edited, some with annotations that edits were made after initial publication.
Going to the Microsoft blog about this it seems less ambiguous, and that it's not implying a subscription. However I wonder if the original blog was edited after first release or not? Or at least what was the first site to make the mistake which then everyone else copied.
I distinctly remember first seeing this and thinking it was very odd, then quickly checking several other sides that had popped up on social media and seeing the same ambiguity and even the same phrasing.
It was speculated early on, I think because of ambiguous wording. The early reports seem to have been edited.
Most of the news reports out there stated this very ambiguously and were conjecturing that this meant that subscription would be used. This includes big sites like the BBC. But I don't see this anymore, a lot of web sites have edited themselves since the initial announcements.
So this is not a Slashdot disinformation plan, if true it is a mistake that was made by many and a very easy mistake to make given the wording in the early reports.
Windows 8 wasn't free though, though it was initially offered at a very low price for those who recently purchased a new machine that had an older version of Windows pre-installed.
If Office license expires you can still do something with your computer though I presume. What happens if Windows expires?
As for the revolt, most Office users buying new copies are corporations, and corporate IT has never said no to Microsoft. Home users however tend to not upgrade yearly. So revolts from them are harder to see, they'll just stick with the latest version they have rather than upgrade.
Only simplistic versions that uses the cloud. Not so handy if you don't have broadband either. I'll use a real program any day over a dumbed down web app.
Yes this is pretty stupid and they should be able to foresee the revolt. As in loudly advertising "Free", which is in all the headlines, only to provide a product that is distinctly not free (in either meaning).
So ya, stick with 7 or 8.1 if you have it.
Possibly. But remember that the "false" is still an opinion. Thus it will be misused tremendously. Better to just flag as "overrated" if too many people found it "informative", or add a comment directly.
Technically it is a fact that the Bible says those things. The biggest Bible thumpers tend to repeat verses rather than just stating opinions as facts, because it emphasizes the authority of the Bible. Such as, "It says in Genesis that God created the heavens and the earth", which is a provably true statement even though is proposes something that is not provable.
Every single political comment from now on will have so many "false" tags that they never get seen.
From the applications world, the order of the day is often to get stuff done fast so that it ships. That often leads to a bad feeling from systems level programmers when they see "typical" application code. I like templates myself, when used sparingly, but have seen it misused and tortured so many times and systems bloated needlessly.
Systems programming generally wants to have control; details are important, speed and size are important, and there can't be any magic happening behind the scenes that the programmers don't know about. This is where things tend to fall down with some higher level features.
For example, exceptions. C++ does this behind the scenes. Unlike setjmp/longjmp in C you can't override what exceptions do, you have no API hooks to implement them yourself or tweak them. So the programmer is forced to work around the compiler in many instances, making sure that their fiddling with the registers isn't going to break exceptions or that an assembler routine screws it all up. And different C++ compilers will implement exceptions different, which is a bit of a hassle if you want to be portable across compilers. Finally the exceptions do cause noticable changes in performance (either speed or size, occasionally both).
But it's certainly possible to use a subset of C++ in systems level programming, but it gets harder and harder the more extra features that get brought in, especially anything that requires specialized runtime support. There are even specific subsets people have defined, like Embedded C++. With D I think it gets used ok here because there's just not as much concern about portability across compilers, but you still have to deal with runtime library overhead for some features and possible space/time tradeoffs.
"Most of the power" is just a poorly chosen but common phrase. If a language is Turing complete then it has all of the power. What is really meant there is "most of the features the author likes".
There was a safe in the Thief reboot game, and nearby was a note that read "I've tried every number combination from 0-0-0 all the way up to 6-7-2. I give up."
In the future, meme's will be the way to tell someone's age if you've only met them online.
Yes, she knows it's a multipass, anyway we're in love.