Not a denomination but they were still a clear sect with teachings and beliefs setting them distinctly apart from other Protestant churches. And they were relatively few. History makes them see more populous than they really were. What people today call "puritan" has only marginal relationship to the actual Puritans.
China has never been able to control that many. That's part of the irony here, they have a centralized party that claims to control everything, but it is so weak that it has very little actual control over the regions. So the regional party bosses very often end up corrupt and abusing power without getting punished for it (or at least not until a school falls down).
National Socialism was very much not socialist in any way. The name was used to attract people. On the other hand, it wasn't very right wing either. But everyone insists it must be one or the other and it's used as a way to tarnish the reputation of the side that they disagree with. Politics these days is just stupid, I'd rather people get along as opposed to parties which claim that the othesr are traitors (not just the US, this is everywhere). Political parties are one of the worst ideas invented in my view.
The third way, learn how people did this in the past and adapt from that. Not just "in the book", which these days seems to be the same as "find it in the code library somewhere". Having a creative solution can often be just as bad. The creative solution may not work, it may have terrible performance, and so forth.
That's too bad. CS used to actually teach stuff, but it has been dumbed down over the years. Coding is simple. If a company only wants coders then good for them but they won't be making great products that way unless they start mixing in people who can go beyond that and start thinking.
A college degree isn't just a way of getting a trade, it should be a way to get the student to learn, learn how to learn, learn how to think well, learn how to be logical, learn how to be abstract, and basically exercise the brain so that it can be useful. Once you've got that, then the problem solving comes more naturally. Learning about other subjects is great because programmes also need domain knowledge. Learning how to write is good too, even for engineers, because you end up writing documentation much more than you write actual code.
Right now, I wish I had computer science people working for me. I have a whole lot of EE types who learned to program on their own, and it shows. They're working on a code base written by EE type people who fundamentally didn't understand a lot of software concepts such that the result is extremely difficult to understand or maintain. But CS people don't like doing anything low level anymore.
My concern is that articles like this just tell a lot of lazy students that skipping college is good for them. If someone can go to college and can afford it, then they will almost always do better with college than without it.
DRM has never been about combating piracy because pirates easily circumvent it. At the most it prevents casual piracy by those who haven't learned how to use google. DRM is really about preventing resales, lending, and enforceing region locking. That is, the people being punished by DRM are those who legally purchased the product.
Quite a lot of theories depend upon omniscient actors, meaning that everyone has perfect knowledge of what is going on everywhere.
As for what you're describing about corporations needing to be more involved, remember that this used to be the case. Employees were hired for the long term, and on-the-job training was the norm. Profits were based on long term results as well. So that naturally meant that good education was important, so that they would get good workers. Good health care and safety was important because you don't want to waste the expense in training those workers. There are a lot of good things that can happen when a company is more concerned about what happens twenty or thirty years down the road rather than obsessing over current quarterly results.
Or just have a better contract that includes things like performance metrics or service level agreements. This is common in many industries. Ie, database is contracted to have an uptime of 99.8% or such.
A good contract might be that in order to get $X tax breaks and benefits and the company promises $Y increase in tax revenue (because of jobs, tourism, etc), then if the tax revenue is only $Z then the penalty should be $Y-$Z up to a maximum of $X. If the company is not confident enough to make this deal then don't trust them. This could apply to sports teams and arenas as well, not just predatory companies.
Of course they're stupid, it's a requirement for the job. Plus of course, anyone who's smart can't get elected because they're too elite for the voters.
I got the upgrade to windows 10, I just never installed it. 8.1 Pro is fine with me,and the $15 price was good. Smaller and faster than Windows 7, and yet it's not Windows 10 which is a plus.
Well, there's an end-date for update of applications too. That's a bad thing as it essentially means you upgrade to Windows 10 and redo all your apps, or downgrade to Windows 7 and go back to normal applications that are supported by their authors. Or don't keep the apps updated. Right now, I can continue running DOS apps if I want, though I have few of those; but I do run some applications that I got with XP.
Those are not critical platforms. Those are fluff platforms. If Twitter vanished tomorrow no one would care very much. They're only important in the sense that many in society have completely forgotten how to get news in other ways.
Alex Jones doesn't fit into a conservative or liberal category, he's in a category best described by clinical psychology. Twitter isn't removing his conservative voice, they're removing a complete nut-job.
And Twitter can do what they want anyway. Just like Fox News doesn't give all the news and keeps some voices out, and NPC doesn't give all the news and keeps some voices out, etc.
On the other hand, even when it comes to the government, there are some few ways in which it is allowed to restrict free speech. Speech that is dangerous for example. It can be argued that Alex Jones is creating dangerous speech when is followers end up threatening people.
By removing Alex Jones, they are not "pushing" an agenda. Alex Jones is the biggest creator of fake news out there. His followers have been harassing parents of murdered children and sending death threats. No company should be required to host his putrid content. If a baker can't be compelled to bake a gay wedding cake then a company can't be required to be the voice of an idiotic conspiracy theorist.
The "media" is in no way the same thing, the media has not been pushing conspiracy theories that cause people who show up armed at a pizza parlor. To equate Alex Jones with the media is amazingly stupid.
The first amendment places a limit on the government only. It does not restrict or compel individuals or companies.
There was the minicomputer revolution too. Starting with "Buy our computers that are affordable for your department and get out from under the thumb of the mainframe", and slowly becoming "UNIX is snake oil", "don't look at that PC", "that was an unauthorized hardware modification".
The big rise in IBM PCs and clones, as opposed to other types of personal computers, was driven by the IBM monoculture. Because it had the word "IBM" on it that meant it was safe to request it in your budget.
But you need end-to-end encryption. Which means your recipient must have a compatible encryption tool. End-to-ISP or end-to-server is not the same thing. Until Google controls every email user, having encryption only for gmail users is short sighted.
I think this has been changing over time. Certainly the ridiculously rich still opposed any pass through of mass transit, or even expressways. But I see lots more new upscale condos and apartments being build next to or near rail or light rail stations, places previously associated with either poorer neighborhoods or retail. I think this is because there are a lot more young people who don't use autos.
As incentive to get women bigger pockets, I would like to remind all men that they will no longer have to hold their wive's purses if they actually had decent pockets.
Go back a few centuries and no one people had pockets. You had pouches to hold stuff attached at the waist, and over time those morphed into pockets for men and purses for women.
Slashdot Mirror
Not a denomination but they were still a clear sect with teachings and beliefs setting them distinctly apart from other Protestant churches. And they were relatively few. History makes them see more populous than they really were. What people today call "puritan" has only marginal relationship to the actual Puritans.
Maybe he only watches Fox News?
China has never been able to control that many. That's part of the irony here, they have a centralized party that claims to control everything, but it is so weak that it has very little actual control over the regions. So the regional party bosses very often end up corrupt and abusing power without getting punished for it (or at least not until a school falls down).
I heard he was going to announce he was relinquishing claims on the South China Sea, after looking at a map and deciding that China was clearly wrong.
National Socialism was very much not socialist in any way. The name was used to attract people. On the other hand, it wasn't very right wing either. But everyone insists it must be one or the other and it's used as a way to tarnish the reputation of the side that they disagree with. Politics these days is just stupid, I'd rather people get along as opposed to parties which claim that the othesr are traitors (not just the US, this is everywhere). Political parties are one of the worst ideas invented in my view.
Yes I agree in many ways. I have heard the excuse of "but we didn't learn that in school" several times.
New languages don't solve things. As the saying used to go back in school, "you can write Fortran in any language".
The third way, learn how people did this in the past and adapt from that. Not just "in the book", which these days seems to be the same as "find it in the code library somewhere". Having a creative solution can often be just as bad. The creative solution may not work, it may have terrible performance, and so forth.
That's too bad. CS used to actually teach stuff, but it has been dumbed down over the years. Coding is simple. If a company only wants coders then good for them but they won't be making great products that way unless they start mixing in people who can go beyond that and start thinking.
A college degree isn't just a way of getting a trade, it should be a way to get the student to learn, learn how to learn, learn how to think well, learn how to be logical, learn how to be abstract, and basically exercise the brain so that it can be useful. Once you've got that, then the problem solving comes more naturally. Learning about other subjects is great because programmes also need domain knowledge. Learning how to write is good too, even for engineers, because you end up writing documentation much more than you write actual code.
Right now, I wish I had computer science people working for me. I have a whole lot of EE types who learned to program on their own, and it shows. They're working on a code base written by EE type people who fundamentally didn't understand a lot of software concepts such that the result is extremely difficult to understand or maintain. But CS people don't like doing anything low level anymore.
My concern is that articles like this just tell a lot of lazy students that skipping college is good for them. If someone can go to college and can afford it, then they will almost always do better with college than without it.
DRM has never been about combating piracy because pirates easily circumvent it. At the most it prevents casual piracy by those who haven't learned how to use google. DRM is really about preventing resales, lending, and enforceing region locking. That is, the people being punished by DRM are those who legally purchased the product.
Fewer customers with indie games, so ever key you give out is potentially lost revenue.
Quite a lot of theories depend upon omniscient actors, meaning that everyone has perfect knowledge of what is going on everywhere.
As for what you're describing about corporations needing to be more involved, remember that this used to be the case. Employees were hired for the long term, and on-the-job training was the norm. Profits were based on long term results as well. So that naturally meant that good education was important, so that they would get good workers. Good health care and safety was important because you don't want to waste the expense in training those workers. There are a lot of good things that can happen when a company is more concerned about what happens twenty or thirty years down the road rather than obsessing over current quarterly results.
If they did have cash, beware that they may want to pay with Amazon Bucks or other sorts of scrip.
Or just have a better contract that includes things like performance metrics or service level agreements. This is common in many industries. Ie, database is contracted to have an uptime of 99.8% or such.
A good contract might be that in order to get $X tax breaks and benefits and the company promises $Y increase in tax revenue (because of jobs, tourism, etc), then if the tax revenue is only $Z then the penalty should be $Y-$Z up to a maximum of $X. If the company is not confident enough to make this deal then don't trust them. This could apply to sports teams and arenas as well, not just predatory companies.
Of course they're stupid, it's a requirement for the job. Plus of course, anyone who's smart can't get elected because they're too elite for the voters.
I got the upgrade to windows 10, I just never installed it. 8.1 Pro is fine with me,and the $15 price was good. Smaller and faster than Windows 7, and yet it's not Windows 10 which is a plus.
Well, there's an end-date for update of applications too. That's a bad thing as it essentially means you upgrade to Windows 10 and redo all your apps, or downgrade to Windows 7 and go back to normal applications that are supported by their authors. Or don't keep the apps updated. Right now, I can continue running DOS apps if I want, though I have few of those; but I do run some applications that I got with XP.
Those are not critical platforms. Those are fluff platforms. If Twitter vanished tomorrow no one would care very much. They're only important in the sense that many in society have completely forgotten how to get news in other ways.
Alex Jones doesn't fit into a conservative or liberal category, he's in a category best described by clinical psychology. Twitter isn't removing his conservative voice, they're removing a complete nut-job.
And Twitter can do what they want anyway. Just like Fox News doesn't give all the news and keeps some voices out, and NPC doesn't give all the news and keeps some voices out, etc.
On the other hand, even when it comes to the government, there are some few ways in which it is allowed to restrict free speech. Speech that is dangerous for example. It can be argued that Alex Jones is creating dangerous speech when is followers end up threatening people.
By removing Alex Jones, they are not "pushing" an agenda. Alex Jones is the biggest creator of fake news out there. His followers have been harassing parents of murdered children and sending death threats. No company should be required to host his putrid content. If a baker can't be compelled to bake a gay wedding cake then a company can't be required to be the voice of an idiotic conspiracy theorist.
The "media" is in no way the same thing, the media has not been pushing conspiracy theories that cause people who show up armed at a pizza parlor. To equate Alex Jones with the media is amazingly stupid.
The first amendment places a limit on the government only. It does not restrict or compel individuals or companies.
There was the minicomputer revolution too. Starting with "Buy our computers that are affordable for your department and get out from under the thumb of the mainframe", and slowly becoming "UNIX is snake oil", "don't look at that PC", "that was an unauthorized hardware modification".
The big rise in IBM PCs and clones, as opposed to other types of personal computers, was driven by the IBM monoculture. Because it had the word "IBM" on it that meant it was safe to request it in your budget.
But you need end-to-end encryption. Which means your recipient must have a compatible encryption tool. End-to-ISP or end-to-server is not the same thing. Until Google controls every email user, having encryption only for gmail users is short sighted.
I think this has been changing over time. Certainly the ridiculously rich still opposed any pass through of mass transit, or even expressways. But I see lots more new upscale condos and apartments being build next to or near rail or light rail stations, places previously associated with either poorer neighborhoods or retail. I think this is because there are a lot more young people who don't use autos.
As incentive to get women bigger pockets, I would like to remind all men that they will no longer have to hold their wive's purses if they actually had decent pockets.
Go back a few centuries and no one people had pockets. You had pouches to hold stuff attached at the waist, and over time those morphed into pockets for men and purses for women.
Fanny packs. They come in his and hers so you can go arm in arm down the street and shock everyone you meet with how cool you are.