You need to start a competitor that doesn't require citations. I realise it'll have to start small, but given your obviously correct ideas its superiority will shine through.
Wikitext is the most awful thing ever. It is barely computable. It provably can't be put into EBNF. Large chunks of it are literally defined as "whatever the PCRE lib in PHP happens to do". It is so horrible it has literally delayed a proper visual editor for Wikipedia by several years. We now have a visual editor that barely works after a huge amount of money and resources have been poured in. The only reason it hasn't been thrown away is that we have ten billion words of legacy content that has to keep working.
tl;dr a markup language is a nice idea, but MediaWiki wikitext is quite possibly the worst possible example and oh if only we could set it on fucking fire.
“The closer you get to (or the farther you get from) your thirtieth birthday, the more likely you are to develop things like taste and discernment, which render you such an exhausting proposition in terms of selling a movie that, well, you might as well have a vagina.”
And tablets. Microsoft's been pushing shitty tablet computers for twenty years. Surface is them finally giving up and making them themselves, but it's not like they're new to the field.
Bill was right: tablet computers are the future! I bet he was pleased when Apple finally got them right.
Same problem as Windows Phone. I know a few people with Windows phones and they love them... the only thing they lament is the utter lack of apps.
Unfortunately, it seems that "Microsoft" and "Windows" are tainted brands. No-one wants to spend personal money to be reminded of Monday morning 9am at work.
That's evading the question. I'm seeking solid numbers (having trouble finding current ones on radio performance royalties), but as far as I can tell Spotify and Pandora pay slightly better per listener-play than the radios they substitute for.
Literally thousands of people are nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize every year. Nominating just means someone has sent in a letter suggesting them. Nomination is not in any way noteworthy.
This is why it's interesting that the people who pay the bills are finally calling "bullshit" on the devs' idiot ideas. Red Hat largely didn't care because their market is basically command-line; but GNOME 3 sucked hard enough that their paying customers were displeased.
If it is possible for a new desktop to be better than its predecessor, then it is possible for it to be worse.
The users largely hate GNOME 3. Therefore, it has failed user acceptance testing. It is worse than its predecessor.
In this case, it's Red Hat - who pay many of the remaining GNOME devs - saying "dunno what you're here for, but we're here to serve our users." It's nice someone is.
Sort of. In practice, taking on an unmaintained library yourself (whether as a public project or just internally) means taking on unknown amounts of technical debt. ("Legacy code" can IMO usefully be approximated to "code dumped on you with unknown technical debt involved".) It might be lovely, it might be a goddamned nightmare.
Any URL that starts forbes.com/sites/ is an unedited blog by some bozo - it's not journalistic content produced by Forbes. It can be any old shit, and usually is.
Slashdot Mirror
You need to start a competitor that doesn't require citations. I realise it'll have to start small, but given your obviously correct ideas its superiority will shine through.
Wikitext is the most awful thing ever. It is barely computable. It provably can't be put into EBNF. Large chunks of it are literally defined as "whatever the PCRE lib in PHP happens to do". It is so horrible it has literally delayed a proper visual editor for Wikipedia by several years. We now have a visual editor that barely works after a huge amount of money and resources have been poured in. The only reason it hasn't been thrown away is that we have ten billion words of legacy content that has to keep working.
tl;dr a markup language is a nice idea, but MediaWiki wikitext is quite possibly the worst possible example and oh if only we could set it on fucking fire.
I know a pile of people with Windows phones. They really like them lots and find the interface marvellous.
Every one of them says the big problem is ... no bloody apps.
This is the link: the sheer horror of marketing the stuff
This is the method, but it's the sheer horror of marketing the stuff that makes it the bible.
“The closer you get to (or the farther you get from) your thirtieth birthday, the more likely you are to develop things like taste and discernment, which render you such an exhausting proposition in terms of selling a movie that, well, you might as well have a vagina.”
See, you shoulda got Andrew writing for you. Just imagine the page hit counts!
Sort of. I've been researching stuff recently in the tech press, and was surprised how different the "same" story could be in Heise and The H.
And tablets. Microsoft's been pushing shitty tablet computers for twenty years. Surface is them finally giving up and making them themselves, but it's not like they're new to the field.
Bill was right: tablet computers are the future! I bet he was pleased when Apple finally got them right.
Same problem as Windows Phone. I know a few people with Windows phones and they love them ... the only thing they lament is the utter lack of apps.
Unfortunately, it seems that "Microsoft" and "Windows" are tainted brands. No-one wants to spend personal money to be reminded of Monday morning 9am at work.
How many records can you say that you in fact love deeply that you've played a total of four times?
That's evading the question. I'm seeking solid numbers (having trouble finding current ones on radio performance royalties), but as far as I can tell Spotify and Pandora pay slightly better per listener-play than the radios they substitute for.
This is a number the Spotify/Pandora whiners will never give you. They keep fraudulently comparing it to sales.
Literally thousands of people are nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize every year. Nominating just means someone has sent in a letter suggesting them. Nomination is not in any way noteworthy.
The standard text is The Tyranny Of Structurelessness by Jo Freeman.
tl;dr: if a visible hierarchy isn't allowed, an invisible one will form and bite you in the ass.
That's not an "ask Slashdot", that's internal advertising for your article.
The meat of which is advertorial for people paying you to mention them.
Fucking grow a spine.
This is why it's interesting that the people who pay the bills are finally calling "bullshit" on the devs' idiot ideas. Red Hat largely didn't care because their market is basically command-line; but GNOME 3 sucked hard enough that their paying customers were displeased.
If it is possible for a new desktop to be better than its predecessor, then it is possible for it to be worse.
The users largely hate GNOME 3. Therefore, it has failed user acceptance testing. It is worse than its predecessor.
In this case, it's Red Hat - who pay many of the remaining GNOME devs - saying "dunno what you're here for, but we're here to serve our users." It's nice someone is.
"We've received your test reports. Your drug intake is well below industry standards. Here's some techno CDs, remedy this immediately."
Pseudoscience is everywhere in Louisiana - a report from the ground.
Sort of. In practice, taking on an unmaintained library yourself (whether as a public project or just internally) means taking on unknown amounts of technical debt. ("Legacy code" can IMO usefully be approximated to "code dumped on you with unknown technical debt involved".) It might be lovely, it might be a goddamned nightmare.
Any URL that starts forbes.com/sites/ is an unedited blog by some bozo - it's not journalistic content produced by Forbes. It can be any old shit, and usually is.
No, MariaDB tested as fast or faster, or they wouldn't have made the move.
No, MariaDB tested as fast or faster, or they wouldn't have made the move.
The Conservative Party could fund itself forever by installing a pay toilet on her grave.
Let me show you something: page view statistics from the last 90 days.
The article had ZERO hits for months ... until yesterday.