And there are other brands of espresso makers doing exactly the same thing, with more recyclable pods, without DRM, and which use a standardized pod used by many vendors. Those that don't explicitly use pods often have metal baskets that accept the pods. And other machines that are more normal coffee makers but which will still make single or double cup servings in a few minutes with easy clean up. Yes, some of those espresso makers that take pods are very expensive, but there are cheaper versions that are competitive with Keurig.
There are some machines that take either a scoop of fresh ground, or a Keurig cup, or a coffee pod, for $50. Why stick to Keurig then and be stuck with a single source DRM encumbered system? Keurig literally has no competitive advantage over the competition except for good marketing and exclusivity deals.
Then don't waste either the plastic or the coffee. Just buy a machine other than Keurig that uses small single-serving scoops or which uses standard paper pods.
You CAN do this with other coffee makers! There are other coffee makers almost exactly like Keurig doing the same thing without DRM, there is even a standard for this so that you can buy your coffee pods from multiple vendors. They're paper pods not plastic. Some even allow using the pod or a small scoop instead, with the same machine. There is nothing whatsoever that Keurig does that another vendor does not also do.
The difference is that Keurig seems to be borrowing a business practice from HP, sell the machines cheap, sell the cartridges/pods with a big markup, and do whatever it takes to forbid the use of cartridges/pods from third parties.
The sad thing is that even with all the varieties of coffee makers that take pods and which take pods from third parties, superior to Keurig, if you hit any major department store you will only see Keurig being sold. That is the only reason it is popular.
The people who refuse to follow line length limits are almost always younger people in my experience. Or they've got a maximized code window, only one single file being viewed at any time, so without being able to put windows side-by-side they see no need to have line length limits. The biggest annoyance though is the utter refusal to follow the team's coding standards, if they think something is stupid they refuse to do it.
Don't forget, newcomers always think they know more than the veterans. So we'll always have a crop of people showing up who refuse to limit the length of their lines and so forth. Landscape allows more columns, and that should be a good thing. The main reason I don't use IDEs is that none I've seen allow side by side views of code (more and more resolution on monitors and people still want to look at one file at a time...).
Now that I think about it, all of the people at work who have portrait oriented monitors also are using standing desks or are at standing lab stations. Maybe they make more sense in that setting, and standing desks are becoming more popular, so maybe portrait becomes more popular?
I don't think I could handle it, my eyes aren't good enough, it feels easier to move my head left or right than up and down.
I use the wide screen because I can see more at once. I can put 3 copies of Emacs side by side, and see the pieces of code next to each other to compare, etc. With portrait mode you can't do that any more; you might have a longer section of vertical code that that's not as helpful to me.
A second monitor would be very helpful though, portrait or not. Ie, code in one monitor, documentation or schematics on the other monitor. Except that I can't really do this without finding a way to get more thunderbolt outputs from the macbook (ie, I way to get the boss to pay for it). On the other hand, most schematics seem to be done using landscape, so the second monitor would probably have to be landscape also, or at least a swivel monitor that let's you switch on the fly.
Apple can hardly get single monitors done right. If you've got the laptop closed with a monitor attached then it sometimes screws stuff up, especially after sleeping and waking back up. Even making resolution of laptop and monitor identical it can screw around with things, resizing and moving all your windows just by plugging in the monitor.
Because "revved up like a deuce in the middle of the night" just sounds like it must be the wrong lyric, a meaningless string of words that's nonsensical. Sure, "douche" is wrong, but "deuce" sounds wrong too. And the way it sounds on the Manfred Mann version it really is closer to "douche" in pronunciation, whereas the original has better enunciation even though the original lyric still doesn't make sense.
I've got a coworker from New Jersey who finds it ludicrous that anyone could make a mistake with that lyric and that it's obvious it's "deuce" and that the lyric actually makes sense. He tried to explain what it meant but didn't succeed, it must be some sort of New Jersey slang for something.
Now excuse me while I sing the wrong lyrics so I can get him riled up again.
Also the permadeath in Rogue/Hack was brutal too. Everything goes great until you enter a room full of stuff that will kill you in one hit (unless you have the wand of lightning or can find the level exit before they catch you). Or you run out of enemies on some levels so that you don't level up enough for deeper parts, or you don't find decent gear, etc. Dying even on the first level is normal. Other games with permadeath were sometimes more fair, so that as long as you were being smart you were pretty safe.
That's why it's normal to expect to restart Rogue over and over and over. The goal was to get high score, or at least in the top ten, rather than to actually win. When someone on a computer actually became a total winner it was a big deal (at least until the advent of Rogue-o-Matic). Hack made things a bit easier, added some more strategy you could use. I actually got to the point where I had the amulet once, but then starved on the way up...
Rogue-like also needs the randomness. Randomly generated levels, random monsters, random loot. Plus it has to be easy to restart because your character will die often (they're a lot like solitaire or minesweeper that way). And not much thinking, as your goal isn't to minimax your build.
It depends on use. Full standalone functions can go into files but then you have a hassle of trying to get your C constants or macros into the assembler. Unless you use the CPP with assembler option. Even then if you need to grab the third field in a struct you're going to have to stick some define in the assembler and make sure your header file and assembler don't get out of sync.
For some smaller stuff you can get more efficient code by not having a function call, as the compiler can optimize what you have as part of a basic block (at least with gcc as you can better control this), your instruction pipeline doesn't burp, and you don't need juggling of registers. It also depends if you think that function calls are expensive on your processor not or if your goal is to save size. A good example here would be a function doing saturated addition which is available on some processors but most languages don't have this as a built-in, and people who want saturated addition almost always want performance.
I do think it's pretty sad that the politics came out full force with this report. Shameful that with something as serious as this is that people resort to politics. What do they believe? Whatever their party tells them to.
Except I think that waterboarding had been treated as a sort of kinder gentler method, scare the guy but don't actually hurt him. After all they train navy seals to resist it. We've had journalists thinking it's no big deal and volunteering to undergo it. So it seems plausible to me that someone gets a big change of mind after seeing what's actually going on.
Who are the terrorists? How do you know and what evidence do you have? People were turned in to soldiers in Afghanistan in order to collect a bounty, but with no evidence against them whatsoever. There are people still being detained for which there is no evidence but the officials also don't to release them. If we wanted to uphold the ideals of the US and its constitution, we'd have given every single one of these people a trial or treated them as normal prisoners of war.
People on US soil are granted rights, terrorists or not. And military bases under full and total control of the US technically count as US soil as far as the constitution goes. As for the moral high ground the constitution *should* apply when any US official, from president down to lowly private third class, commits an action in another country that is illegal at home.
The US government is not protecting us. Instead the US government has become the most powerful recruiting arm of Al Qaeda.
Historically, when the US captured prisoners in some wars they would later say that they were afraid and though that the US soldiers were going to kill or torture them and were surprised to be treated properly. The propaganda was against us but we didn't use it as an excuse to do what we liked. At the end of WWII there were German soldiers who made efforts be captured by Americans instead of Soviets.
Slashdot Mirror
http://www.podmerchant.com/
And other vendors can make you coffee from a pod in one or two minutes with little to no cleanup, but without the DRM.
And there are other brands of espresso makers doing exactly the same thing, with more recyclable pods, without DRM, and which use a standardized pod used by many vendors. Those that don't explicitly use pods often have metal baskets that accept the pods. And other machines that are more normal coffee makers but which will still make single or double cup servings in a few minutes with easy clean up. Yes, some of those espresso makers that take pods are very expensive, but there are cheaper versions that are competitive with Keurig.
There are some machines that take either a scoop of fresh ground, or a Keurig cup, or a coffee pod, for $50. Why stick to Keurig then and be stuck with a single source DRM encumbered system? Keurig literally has no competitive advantage over the competition except for good marketing and exclusivity deals.
http://www.podmerchant.com/cof...
http://aerobie.com/Products/ae...
Then don't waste either the plastic or the coffee. Just buy a machine other than Keurig that uses small single-serving scoops or which uses standard paper pods.
You CAN do this with other coffee makers! There are other coffee makers almost exactly like Keurig doing the same thing without DRM, there is even a standard for this so that you can buy your coffee pods from multiple vendors. They're paper pods not plastic. Some even allow using the pod or a small scoop instead, with the same machine. There is nothing whatsoever that Keurig does that another vendor does not also do.
The difference is that Keurig seems to be borrowing a business practice from HP, sell the machines cheap, sell the cartridges/pods with a big markup, and do whatever it takes to forbid the use of cartridges/pods from third parties.
The sad thing is that even with all the varieties of coffee makers that take pods and which take pods from third parties, superior to Keurig, if you hit any major department store you will only see Keurig being sold. That is the only reason it is popular.
The people who refuse to follow line length limits are almost always younger people in my experience. Or they've got a maximized code window, only one single file being viewed at any time, so without being able to put windows side-by-side they see no need to have line length limits. The biggest annoyance though is the utter refusal to follow the team's coding standards, if they think something is stupid they refuse to do it.
Don't forget, newcomers always think they know more than the veterans. So we'll always have a crop of people showing up who refuse to limit the length of their lines and so forth. Landscape allows more columns, and that should be a good thing. The main reason I don't use IDEs is that none I've seen allow side by side views of code (more and more resolution on monitors and people still want to look at one file at a time...).
Now that I think about it, all of the people at work who have portrait oriented monitors also are using standing desks or are at standing lab stations. Maybe they make more sense in that setting, and standing desks are becoming more popular, so maybe portrait becomes more popular?
I don't think I could handle it, my eyes aren't good enough, it feels easier to move my head left or right than up and down.
I use the wide screen because I can see more at once. I can put 3 copies of Emacs side by side, and see the pieces of code next to each other to compare, etc. With portrait mode you can't do that any more; you might have a longer section of vertical code that that's not as helpful to me.
A second monitor would be very helpful though, portrait or not. Ie, code in one monitor, documentation or schematics on the other monitor. Except that I can't really do this without finding a way to get more thunderbolt outputs from the macbook (ie, I way to get the boss to pay for it). On the other hand, most schematics seem to be done using landscape, so the second monitor would probably have to be landscape also, or at least a swivel monitor that let's you switch on the fly.
Apple can hardly get single monitors done right. If you've got the laptop closed with a monitor attached then it sometimes screws stuff up, especially after sleeping and waking back up. Even making resolution of laptop and monitor identical it can screw around with things, resizing and moving all your windows just by plugging in the monitor.
Ok, I'll admit it, the lyrics I heard from Dexy's Midnight Runners was "Come on my knee". I knew it was wrong but that's what I heard.
Because "revved up like a deuce in the middle of the night" just sounds like it must be the wrong lyric, a meaningless string of words that's nonsensical. Sure, "douche" is wrong, but "deuce" sounds wrong too. And the way it sounds on the Manfred Mann version it really is closer to "douche" in pronunciation, whereas the original has better enunciation even though the original lyric still doesn't make sense.
I've got a coworker from New Jersey who finds it ludicrous that anyone could make a mistake with that lyric and that it's obvious it's "deuce" and that the lyric actually makes sense. He tried to explain what it meant but didn't succeed, it must be some sort of New Jersey slang for something.
Now excuse me while I sing the wrong lyrics so I can get him riled up again.
Basically if the hashtag is #KKK they don't want an angry mob ruining their thoughtful discussion about the whites sale at Macy's.
Also the permadeath in Rogue/Hack was brutal too. Everything goes great until you enter a room full of stuff that will kill you in one hit (unless you have the wand of lightning or can find the level exit before they catch you). Or you run out of enemies on some levels so that you don't level up enough for deeper parts, or you don't find decent gear, etc. Dying even on the first level is normal. Other games with permadeath were sometimes more fair, so that as long as you were being smart you were pretty safe.
That's why it's normal to expect to restart Rogue over and over and over. The goal was to get high score, or at least in the top ten, rather than to actually win. When someone on a computer actually became a total winner it was a big deal (at least until the advent of Rogue-o-Matic). Hack made things a bit easier, added some more strategy you could use. I actually got to the point where I had the amulet once, but then starved on the way up...
There were actually Rogue-like MUD games, ascii graphics and all. MAngband, Rogue Mud, etc.
Yup, Hack is the real Hack, NetHack is a poseur.
Rogue-like also needs the randomness. Randomly generated levels, random monsters, random loot. Plus it has to be easy to restart because your character will die often (they're a lot like solitaire or minesweeper that way). And not much thinking, as your goal isn't to minimax your build.
It depends on use. Full standalone functions can go into files but then you have a hassle of trying to get your C constants or macros into the assembler. Unless you use the CPP with assembler option. Even then if you need to grab the third field in a struct you're going to have to stick some define in the assembler and make sure your header file and assembler don't get out of sync.
For some smaller stuff you can get more efficient code by not having a function call, as the compiler can optimize what you have as part of a basic block (at least with gcc as you can better control this), your instruction pipeline doesn't burp, and you don't need juggling of registers. It also depends if you think that function calls are expensive on your processor not or if your goal is to save size. A good example here would be a function doing saturated addition which is available on some processors but most languages don't have this as a built-in, and people who want saturated addition almost always want performance.
I predict that consulting companies face billions in losses as the markets continue to lose faith in their predictions.
I do think it's pretty sad that the politics came out full force with this report. Shameful that with something as serious as this is that people resort to politics. What do they believe? Whatever their party tells them to.
Except I think that waterboarding had been treated as a sort of kinder gentler method, scare the guy but don't actually hurt him. After all they train navy seals to resist it. We've had journalists thinking it's no big deal and volunteering to undergo it. So it seems plausible to me that someone gets a big change of mind after seeing what's actually going on.
Who are the terrorists? How do you know and what evidence do you have? People were turned in to soldiers in Afghanistan in order to collect a bounty, but with no evidence against them whatsoever. There are people still being detained for which there is no evidence but the officials also don't to release them. If we wanted to uphold the ideals of the US and its constitution, we'd have given every single one of these people a trial or treated them as normal prisoners of war.
People on US soil are granted rights, terrorists or not. And military bases under full and total control of the US technically count as US soil as far as the constitution goes. As for the moral high ground the constitution *should* apply when any US official, from president down to lowly private third class, commits an action in another country that is illegal at home.
The US government is not protecting us. Instead the US government has become the most powerful recruiting arm of Al Qaeda.
Historically, when the US captured prisoners in some wars they would later say that they were afraid and though that the US soldiers were going to kill or torture them and were surprised to be treated properly. The propaganda was against us but we didn't use it as an excuse to do what we liked. At the end of WWII there were German soldiers who made efforts be captured by Americans instead of Soviets.
Today though...
There is evidence that it was more than 3 prisoners, maybe not in Gitmo itself.
And when the soldiers refuse to do the deed because it violates the military code, then the CIA will step in or we'll get contractors.