Have 2 lines, line A, is the current TSA security check line, line B, no other security check, but they do have to manually probe the inside of your ass for at least 10 minutes.
This would not only have the effect of making the security process more efficient (because some people would still probably pick line B) but would also contribute to a dramatic cut back in volume of complaints about the security procedures in line A.
Or just tazer everyone at the gate before they board. It probably wouldn't solve the security problem, but it would be really fun to watch. As a bonus, you could charge everyone a tazering surcharge on their ticket price to cover your overhead.
Exactly. The thing is, I think Java is more ideal for teaching OOP to beginners. Things like pointers and memory allocation, in my opinion, get in the way of teaching OOP concepts because those things are mechanics of the language, like an if statement or a for loop. Once they get OOP concepts down, *then* have another class that teaches C/C++ and all its quirky kooky pointer and memory stuff.
And while I agree perl is a bad first language, if you have the fortitude to see it through it *really* helps you pick up anything else, because you can always say, "Well, at least its not perl..."
"College just got me a piece of paper that opened the door."
Good point. This is the way I observed the world working. I graduated with a degree in the biological sciences and another in spanish, and now I'm a perl programmer. Go figure. Of course, most of the time my job demands skills in system integration rather than programming anything anyway.
I later went back and took some technology courses and the professor gave the class the choice of what language to use. After we decided on Java (because that is what most of them had experience in lower classes in) then the project was unveiled and we had to actually to break into groups to design the system, each group taking a different "department" for our Point-of-sale application (ie one group did warehouse, another did gui, another did system db stuff, etc). Later I found out in my job that this experience was the one that helps me the most everyday. Thing is, it was a 300 level undergraduate class.
So I guess what I'm saying is usefulness of any given course is directly proportional to the department and professor offering it.
"I don't think the problem is with the languages being taught, but in the lack of true engineering being taught. This is true of any of the programming related fields (CS, MIS, SE). All of them need these skills."
I would go one further and say that this is true of any field. Universities are concerned with handing out as many degrees as possible, not teaching a field of knowledge. Students are concerned with getting A's, not learning a field of knowledge. At the university I work for, our department regularly gets bitched out by the president's office because students have their mom call the president of the university when they don't get an A. How insane is that? The president's office then assume that our department is doing something wrong, because mommy is the one ultimately paying the tuition bill. The net effect of all this is undergraduate education in this country has become High School 2.0 .
I read the article, and scrolled through the first page of comments, and can't seem to find the answer to this question: How did the RIAA know he had ripped all these cds to his hard drive? Was he caught doing something else (ie using Kazaa or whatever the kids use these days) and they decided to get him for the 2000 mp3s he wasn't sharing as well or something?
One thing I've noticed in my state is that if the light is a left turning lane arrow, it might not give you the opportunity to go first if you coast up to it while its red, and instead lets the opposing traffic go first. But if you were stationary in front of it while red it would have let you go before the opposing traffic.
That is not to say its smart to speed up to it and brake suddenly if its red. But it is annoying when there is a guy in front of me and we both are approaching a turning lane where I know if we were sitting there during the red it would give us the arrow to go first, but he just coasts up to it and screws us all.
Not road rage annoyed mind you, just mildly annoyed.
My solution is to just go the speed limit. Everyone else is going speed limit +5 or +10 or more. The net result is a very smooth drive where everyone goes around me and there is always plenty of room in between me and the car in front of me. Unless the bastard in front is going speed limit minus x, which people tend to do when they are talking on their mobile. I hate those annoying bastards.
A beneficial side effect is I never have to break or worry about pulling over if I see a police car. I believe another effect is slightly better gas mileage, but I have no proof of that.
Also, I've done the math, even going 20 over the speed limit only gets me to most destinations something like 6 minutes quicker, so I figure I might as well use that 6 minutes to remove a significant source of stress from my life.
I don't really see the privacy implications. Presumably, those going to this research facility to eat know that its a research facility. They have to sign a consent form. The title of the article should be "Eat, Drink, and Participate in Food Science Research", but I guess "Eat, Drink, and Be Monitored" just sounds more Orwellian.
""The salary sin pays is death". "The **soul** that is sinning will die"."
Its still a shit sandwich, since The Creator created us to sin. That is sadistic. The way I see it, if I'm going to be forced to eat a shit sandwich, I might as well bring my own mayonnaise.
You are arguing semantics, based on ideas that have been translated and translated again. The bottom line is, the bible mentions that all those who don't accept Jesus or worship God or otherwise follow the 'rules' laid out in the bible, will be punished. Whether that punishment is called Hades or Hell or Damnation or "Not knowing God for all eternity" or whatever else you can semantically argue is irrelevant, the fact remains: You very clearly are punished for exercising your 'choice' to not follow the bible. I use the word 'choice' in quotes because the thesis of my argument is that its not really a choice when the alternative is a negative consequence. Its enslavement.
"Plus, Revelation 20:13 says that Hades will give up those in it."
Well that would be irrelevant if nobody was sent there for disobeying the word of God, wouldn't it?
"That link says "The soul (the conscious part of us) is what goes to Hades. (Acts 2:27.)" whereas Ecc 9:5,10 plainly says the dead are not conscious."
What does that have to do with anything? So one verse says the dead are not conscious, and a hundred others say people who die not obeying the word of God are punished in some way. You mean the Bible is self-contradictory??? Say it ain't so!!
You could also read those 2 above sentences as complimentary to one another rather than contradictory: When you die, your body is dead in the ground and not conscious (ECC (:5,10), meanwhile your soul goes to heaven and/or hell.
By the way, I'm not trying to say that that site I linked to is accurate or inaccurate. I personally don't care whether there is a heaven or hell. I just think its inaccurate to say that the bible doesn't mention any punishment for not following it, when it clearly does, both explicitly and implicitly. Further, that is what is reinforced by most churches I've been to, even the touchy-feely Fundie Jesus churches describe the consequences of not accepting Jesus as punishment.
Big Deal. Human females have been doing this to the males of their species for millenia. And they don't even have to inject any chemicals into our brains to lead us around by our torsal appendages before they and their young turn us into working slaves and eat us alive slowly, over the course of 50 or so years.
"Anyone still think Islam is the religion of peace?"
Did anybody ever really think that? Isn't that just what they tell the n00bs? Same goes for any religion really. Its not really the fault of Islam though. Or christianity for that matter. I mean, a religion can't logically be violent or peaceful. Its not a living thing. Its followers are what's violent or peaceful. The religion is merely the justification. Of course no institution that lasted 1000+ years would be around that long if it couldn't be twisted to justify both war and peace.
In computing, we would call this a PEBKAC error. "Problem Exists Between Keyboard and Chair".
"No, the Bible shows that we have free will to bring joy to our Creator when we choose to worship him."
Its not really much of a choice though if its "bring joy to me OR experience eternal suffering and damnation". How about this: you bring me a good donut (I'll leave it up to you to decide if the donut is good or not), OR I bash your fricking teeth in with a baseball bat. Which one would you choose? Remember, the choice is totally yours. Also, remember that the conditions is that its a *good* donut. But I'm not going to tell you what the definition of good is. Ok, well, maybe I'll tell somebody to tell you, but I'm also going to make the explanation completely counter-intuitive to your every day experience. Also, I'm going to tell other people to tell you a conflicting definition of a good donut in hundreds of completely logical and credible ways.
Well, what is your choice?
Censorship aside, if this report is true, its the equivalent of gamespot committing suicide. Who is going to trust any reviews on the site now that this link is widely known. They would have been better off telling Eidos to go piss up a rope. Even if its not true, their reputation is probably irrevocably tarnished. I know next time I am trying to decide whether or not to buy a game based on reviews, I wouldn't trust their opinion.
What about the across the board blank media tax you guys have up there? I thought that was meant to compensate for any piracy that goes on.
Also, one thing I really envied about Canadian copyright law was your ability to make copies on a limited basis for friends and families.
This really sucks, I hope it doesn't become law. Even it it means you can no longer rub our nose in the DMCA. Actually, I kid. I welcome the good natured ribbing from our neighbors to the north.
Wow. Just, wow. Thank you for that link. That talk was amazing, and very relevant to the thread. This sort of anthropology is very interesting to me, and I am probably going to buy his book.
Yeah. Right on! We all know police in the UK would never ever not in a million years ever shoot somebody 5 times in the head in the metro.
I think you guys have lots to learn about how violence is used or misused. I could drag Ireland into the conversation here, but I won't. (But I did! Suck on that!).
"Insurgency, even if successful, rarely leads to a stable state of affairs. Look at all the guerilla wars of the past and show me one stable and free society that appeared after it was over."
Ireland.
That's a fair point. I mean really it comes down to intent and what the access was used for. The original point of the article was to claim that there is widespread blatant lawbreaking going on in the form of people using wifi that is generally available for use. I just don't think I can agree with that view, regardless of the skill levels of either party.
"Nope. You bought the computer, you're expected to know how it works. Just because the default setting is to scan everything doesn't mean you're not responsible.
Third obligatory car analogy: If you park your car without setting the brake, it will by default roll downhill. Your fault, not the car's. The car (or your OS) cannot express any volition, only you can."
You have to have a license to operate the car. You can't claim ignorance because part of the licensing procedure covers setting the brake. You do not need a license to operate a computer. Anyone can buy and use one without having to know how it works.
"and I use natural firefly technology to see in the dark."
pfft. Fireflies and piezo rocks? How extravagant. You must be one of those fat cats down at the power company. Me? I'm posting this via smoke signal protocol generated by burning my own feces. I use natural 'hands' technology to feel-around in the dark.
Just like the NSA does - with a squad of hot deadly babes, each schooled in some particular art of death and destruction.
The blond would be a master of disguise and infiltration. The black chick would be good with explosives. The brunette would be really smart, wear glasses and can make any kind of explosive in the lab or in the field. The red-head would be deadly with edged weapons, and the asian chick deadly with poison. All of them would be skilled in martial arts, and dress in skin tight leather mini-skirts.
Its pretty much the standard way of fighting any kind of evil organization here in the West.
Slashdot Mirror
Have 2 lines, line A, is the current TSA security check line, line B, no other security check, but they do have to manually probe the inside of your ass for at least 10 minutes.
This would not only have the effect of making the security process more efficient (because some people would still probably pick line B) but would also contribute to a dramatic cut back in volume of complaints about the security procedures in line A.
Or just tazer everyone at the gate before they board. It probably wouldn't solve the security problem, but it would be really fun to watch. As a bonus, you could charge everyone a tazering surcharge on their ticket price to cover your overhead.
Exactly. The thing is, I think Java is more ideal for teaching OOP to beginners. Things like pointers and memory allocation, in my opinion, get in the way of teaching OOP concepts because those things are mechanics of the language, like an if statement or a for loop. Once they get OOP concepts down, *then* have another class that teaches C/C++ and all its quirky kooky pointer and memory stuff.
And while I agree perl is a bad first language, if you have the fortitude to see it through it *really* helps you pick up anything else, because you can always say, "Well, at least its not perl..."
"College just got me a piece of paper that opened the door."
Good point. This is the way I observed the world working. I graduated with a degree in the biological sciences and another in spanish, and now I'm a perl programmer. Go figure. Of course, most of the time my job demands skills in system integration rather than programming anything anyway.
I later went back and took some technology courses and the professor gave the class the choice of what language to use. After we decided on Java (because that is what most of them had experience in lower classes in) then the project was unveiled and we had to actually to break into groups to design the system, each group taking a different "department" for our Point-of-sale application (ie one group did warehouse, another did gui, another did system db stuff, etc). Later I found out in my job that this experience was the one that helps me the most everyday. Thing is, it was a 300 level undergraduate class.
So I guess what I'm saying is usefulness of any given course is directly proportional to the department and professor offering it.
"I don't think the problem is with the languages being taught, but in the lack of true engineering being taught. This is true of any of the programming related fields (CS, MIS, SE). All of them need these skills."
I would go one further and say that this is true of any field. Universities are concerned with handing out as many degrees as possible, not teaching a field of knowledge. Students are concerned with getting A's, not learning a field of knowledge. At the university I work for, our department regularly gets bitched out by the president's office because students have their mom call the president of the university when they don't get an A. How insane is that? The president's office then assume that our department is doing something wrong, because mommy is the one ultimately paying the tuition bill. The net effect of all this is undergraduate education in this country has become High School 2.0 .
I read the article, and scrolled through the first page of comments, and can't seem to find the answer to this question: How did the RIAA know he had ripped all these cds to his hard drive? Was he caught doing something else (ie using Kazaa or whatever the kids use these days) and they decided to get him for the 2000 mp3s he wasn't sharing as well or something?
One thing I've noticed in my state is that if the light is a left turning lane arrow, it might not give you the opportunity to go first if you coast up to it while its red, and instead lets the opposing traffic go first. But if you were stationary in front of it while red it would have let you go before the opposing traffic.
That is not to say its smart to speed up to it and brake suddenly if its red. But it is annoying when there is a guy in front of me and we both are approaching a turning lane where I know if we were sitting there during the red it would give us the arrow to go first, but he just coasts up to it and screws us all.
Not road rage annoyed mind you, just mildly annoyed.
My solution is to just go the speed limit. Everyone else is going speed limit +5 or +10 or more. The net result is a very smooth drive where everyone goes around me and there is always plenty of room in between me and the car in front of me. Unless the bastard in front is going speed limit minus x, which people tend to do when they are talking on their mobile. I hate those annoying bastards.
A beneficial side effect is I never have to break or worry about pulling over if I see a police car. I believe another effect is slightly better gas mileage, but I have no proof of that.
Also, I've done the math, even going 20 over the speed limit only gets me to most destinations something like 6 minutes quicker, so I figure I might as well use that 6 minutes to remove a significant source of stress from my life.
I don't really see the privacy implications. Presumably, those going to this research facility to eat know that its a research facility. They have to sign a consent form. The title of the article should be "Eat, Drink, and Participate in Food Science Research", but I guess "Eat, Drink, and Be Monitored" just sounds more Orwellian.
""The salary sin pays is death". "The **soul** that is sinning will die"." Its still a shit sandwich, since The Creator created us to sin. That is sadistic. The way I see it, if I'm going to be forced to eat a shit sandwich, I might as well bring my own mayonnaise.
You are arguing semantics, based on ideas that have been translated and translated again. The bottom line is, the bible mentions that all those who don't accept Jesus or worship God or otherwise follow the 'rules' laid out in the bible, will be punished. Whether that punishment is called Hades or Hell or Damnation or "Not knowing God for all eternity" or whatever else you can semantically argue is irrelevant, the fact remains: You very clearly are punished for exercising your 'choice' to not follow the bible. I use the word 'choice' in quotes because the thesis of my argument is that its not really a choice when the alternative is a negative consequence. Its enslavement.
"Plus, Revelation 20:13 says that Hades will give up those in it."
Well that would be irrelevant if nobody was sent there for disobeying the word of God, wouldn't it?
"That link says "The soul (the conscious part of us) is what goes to Hades. (Acts 2:27.)" whereas Ecc 9:5,10 plainly says the dead are not conscious."
What does that have to do with anything? So one verse says the dead are not conscious, and a hundred others say people who die not obeying the word of God are punished in some way. You mean the Bible is self-contradictory??? Say it ain't so!!
You could also read those 2 above sentences as complimentary to one another rather than contradictory: When you die, your body is dead in the ground and not conscious (ECC (:5,10), meanwhile your soul goes to heaven and/or hell.
By the way, I'm not trying to say that that site I linked to is accurate or inaccurate. I personally don't care whether there is a heaven or hell. I just think its inaccurate to say that the bible doesn't mention any punishment for not following it, when it clearly does, both explicitly and implicitly. Further, that is what is reinforced by most churches I've been to, even the touchy-feely Fundie Jesus churches describe the consequences of not accepting Jesus as punishment.
Oh doesn't it? My bad. I guess this site is quoting from some other "The Bible" then: http://www.lookup.org/hell.htm
Big Deal. Human females have been doing this to the males of their species for millenia. And they don't even have to inject any chemicals into our brains to lead us around by our torsal appendages before they and their young turn us into working slaves and eat us alive slowly, over the course of 50 or so years.
"Anyone still think Islam is the religion of peace?"
Did anybody ever really think that? Isn't that just what they tell the n00bs? Same goes for any religion really. Its not really the fault of Islam though. Or christianity for that matter. I mean, a religion can't logically be violent or peaceful. Its not a living thing. Its followers are what's violent or peaceful. The religion is merely the justification. Of course no institution that lasted 1000+ years would be around that long if it couldn't be twisted to justify both war and peace.
In computing, we would call this a PEBKAC error. "Problem Exists Between Keyboard and Chair".
"No, the Bible shows that we have free will to bring joy to our Creator when we choose to worship him." Its not really much of a choice though if its "bring joy to me OR experience eternal suffering and damnation". How about this: you bring me a good donut (I'll leave it up to you to decide if the donut is good or not), OR I bash your fricking teeth in with a baseball bat. Which one would you choose? Remember, the choice is totally yours. Also, remember that the conditions is that its a *good* donut. But I'm not going to tell you what the definition of good is. Ok, well, maybe I'll tell somebody to tell you, but I'm also going to make the explanation completely counter-intuitive to your every day experience. Also, I'm going to tell other people to tell you a conflicting definition of a good donut in hundreds of completely logical and credible ways. Well, what is your choice?
I'm pro-YOUR-abortion. As soon as I get my time machine completed.
Censorship aside, if this report is true, its the equivalent of gamespot committing suicide. Who is going to trust any reviews on the site now that this link is widely known. They would have been better off telling Eidos to go piss up a rope. Even if its not true, their reputation is probably irrevocably tarnished. I know next time I am trying to decide whether or not to buy a game based on reviews, I wouldn't trust their opinion.
Bad move on the part of gamespot.
What about the across the board blank media tax you guys have up there? I thought that was meant to compensate for any piracy that goes on.
Also, one thing I really envied about Canadian copyright law was your ability to make copies on a limited basis for friends and families.
This really sucks, I hope it doesn't become law. Even it it means you can no longer rub our nose in the DMCA. Actually, I kid. I welcome the good natured ribbing from our neighbors to the north.
Wow. Just, wow. Thank you for that link. That talk was amazing, and very relevant to the thread. This sort of anthropology is very interesting to me, and I am probably going to buy his book.
Yeah. Right on! We all know police in the UK would never ever not in a million years ever shoot somebody 5 times in the head in the metro.
I think you guys have lots to learn about how violence is used or misused. I could drag Ireland into the conversation here, but I won't. (But I did! Suck on that!).
"Insurgency, even if successful, rarely leads to a stable state of affairs. Look at all the guerilla wars of the past and show me one stable and free society that appeared after it was over." Ireland.
That's a fair point. I mean really it comes down to intent and what the access was used for. The original point of the article was to claim that there is widespread blatant lawbreaking going on in the form of people using wifi that is generally available for use. I just don't think I can agree with that view, regardless of the skill levels of either party.
"Nope. You bought the computer, you're expected to know how it works. Just because the default setting is to scan everything doesn't mean you're not responsible.
Third obligatory car analogy: If you park your car without setting the brake, it will by default roll downhill. Your fault, not the car's. The car (or your OS) cannot express any volition, only you can."
You have to have a license to operate the car. You can't claim ignorance because part of the licensing procedure covers setting the brake. You do not need a license to operate a computer. Anyone can buy and use one without having to know how it works.
"and I use natural firefly technology to see in the dark."
pfft. Fireflies and piezo rocks? How extravagant. You must be one of those fat cats down at the power company. Me? I'm posting this via smoke signal protocol generated by burning my own feces. I use natural 'hands' technology to feel-around in the dark.
People still have landlines? Pathetic.
"How would you FIGHT terrorism."
Just like the NSA does - with a squad of hot deadly babes, each schooled in some particular art of death and destruction.
The blond would be a master of disguise and infiltration. The black chick would be good with explosives. The brunette would be really smart, wear glasses and can make any kind of explosive in the lab or in the field. The red-head would be deadly with edged weapons, and the asian chick deadly with poison. All of them would be skilled in martial arts, and dress in skin tight leather mini-skirts.
Its pretty much the standard way of fighting any kind of evil organization here in the West.
Leprechauns?