oh, that's easy: you are a duche, which is like a small insignificant wrinkled douche. See, now we have a pretty good description of what you look like. Small and wrinkled - duche./. figured you out just right, but I still think you are a scared little anonymous coward little wrinkled duche, with no discernible skills, you can't even use your mother tongue better than a foreigner, who learned the damn language.
I am now witnessing a degradation, whether I am talking to a computer program or a human, in either case, the observation is that this entity has descended into the lowest state of getting ready to throw feces at the opponent. This is the de-evolution, degradation, supposedly a higher entity moving down to reflect the lowest standard of communication. You are now something of a monkey.
You don't like my English?
, .
Peut-etre tu preferais parler au tongue royal, je ne pense pas que tu are prete pour ce, parce que tu est un tete de noeud, salope.
Now I think I maybe talking to an automaton, who is running in an infinite loop. 'Stupid' - is that the best they programmed you with? You are a broken machine, a faulty computer, an incorrect algorithm and it is sad.
you think that something that exists in front of your eyes is unimaginable... perhaps you don't know what it means to be able to imagine something. if not, you were instigating argument... so again, you are pointing out exactly why you are wrong seemingly to prove why you think you aren't wrong. you are stupid.
- every conversation is about instigating an argument, otherwise what is the point of a conversation? But that is a rhetorical question, and as we have demonstrated an a few occasions here, you do not posses the intelligence to parse out such complexities of the language, which is ironic, supposedly you are the one with the native grasp of this tongue in this dialog. However it has long ceased being a dialog and most likely it never were, it is simply a diatribe.
since you were the first one to complain about my logic, my intellect etc., I suggest you do this yourself, so that I can summarily dismiss all of your claims in about half a sentence. Good luck with all of that.
if the money is worthless, the spending is irrelevant.
- this does not follow from anything, money is becoming worthless by government printing it, by not having trade balanced. However the money is not worthless as long as you can buy food / energy / shelter with them and as long as you are willing to work for it. The worthlessness of the money will come later, when the rest of the world will stop providing US with more debt by buying treasuries and when they call on the debt.
your point seems to be that the dam is sure to break, so there is no point trying to fix it, but we should still buy more and more paste to stick in the holes for a little while. then if someone points out how silly it is, rhetorically state the above as if it justifys everything.
- financially the dam is braking, politically you can do something about it to mitigate the consequences now, rather than witnessing a collapse of yet another country, besides which citizen of the US is willing to do nothing at all and go through the collapse without even trying? Maybe you are, are you really a good representative of the population though? I think it is unlikely.
the pure definition of flamebait...
- when I see someone stating that something is a 'pure definitions', I know I am dealing with either an idiot or a religious fanatic (very close things in my book) - now you see, that was a flamebait. What I said about Lieberman is not, it is my opinion, which you may disagree with and you may hate, but it was never a flamebait.
'The fed' is a corporate whore as a whole as much as most of its parts. The rest of your post is nonsense and non-sequitur since it never follows the premises, which are wrong in themselves.
As I said, new politicians have about 2 years to be corrupted by the system, so the system needs a more swift kick to be updated with a reform of election financing and voting out the establishment. It has started now and will not take 1000 years. AFAIC the US financially is destroyed and is in motion only by the force of inertia. The US dollar will collapse due to imbalance of trade and an enormous debt, and the situation will be triggered by a failure on some of the derivatives traded in the financial market. What happened in 2009 will happen again but on a more total scale. After that there could be a war and a clean slate supposedly, but I don't read the future, I just see similarities to the histories of the past. You will have your reforms and changes one way or another. It would be better for you to have it done by voting.
you start with a 'genius' and end with the 'stupid'. I guess that's the crux of the problem, I am looking at the issues, you are looking for something else altogether, I call it trolling.
People put Lieberman to power as much as corporate cash put him to power, let's see how this plays out next time in his state. 'People' will not get any benefit from him in his state, now corporations will, 'people' will see it this time.
Bill Halter - lieutenant governor of Arkansas has declared he is going to be running against Blanche Lincoln, who is a Democrat but she has done everything to represent corporate interests.
Obama is going to defend Blanche Lincoln, because he also is a corporatist who does not want any reform.
Blanche Lincoln is a corporatist, who took corporate money and for example voted against the public option in your country.
Bill Halter is not of-course a non-politician, he will not come and change everything, he'll become corrupt in a couple of years, but that's because everyone else in Washington is corrupt. That's why every corporatist whore needs to be voted out and replaced with new people, this way with all new people, it should be really possible to run reforms to fix the problems.
Peter Schiff is running in Connecticut where Chris Dodd, the 'Democrat' and really a corporatist used to be a senator. Of-course Dodd just quit being senator to become a lobbyist, so he'll cash in on his implied bribes from the corporations he represented. Schiff is a libertarian, never mind he runs as a Republican, his father is imprisoned for working against IRS and showing people how not to pay taxes.
Scott Brown won in a Democratic state, an amazing NOBODY that he is, but look, he just voted against Republicans for the 'jobs bill' (not that I agree with make shift government projects, but...)
Yes, it is possible to change the establishment by removing the corporatists and it does not take 1000 years and inventing a perpetual motion machine.
as I said, reform the process of how the politicians communicate with corporations, outlaw corporate donations, provide people, who collected enough signatures with some funding so they don't have to market themselves to the lobbyists and the corporations, but only have to concentrate on their work. This is a huge problem - corporate money going for or against a politician and it is legal in your country. Everything else is noise.
- sure, but it is not in itself a sarcastic remark in any way that is explicit.
The sarcasm is derived from the assumption of using Python (a young language) as the accepted standard rather than C. (the older language)
- well, that's deep, I give it to you, but it is deep in your head, it is not at all visible, if you wanted to be actually understood, you could have made it more explicit that this was your attempt at 'sarcasm'. Also it's Thompson, not K or R.
Let me see, how would I do sarcasm in this case? ---
I know why there is this new language now, forget about everything else, Ken just wanted to make a point of the correct style of opening braces and he came up with a language that does not allow you to do any different!
- Ken wanted to make a point of 'the correct style'? As if he ever created a language or anything else that set any precedents of standards the way Python does. Heresy! --- Ok, so maybe the above can be identified as a sarcasm and the link to the comparative age of B to Python is not only in my own head but also is somewhere, where it can be seen on the page. Unless you believe that what you type into the forum and what is in your head are equivalent?
The great thing about standards, of course, is that there are so many of them. I consider code's readability and it is for me related to the manner in which the code is displayed, and the style that I find the most practical as well as pleasing to the eye is K&R variant. So this is the main point of contention here.
If you want to ram your favourite style down your team's throats, and discriminate against other coders simply because you're set in your ways... then go ahead. Not my problem. It's not yours either - it's only a problem for the guy with a different opinion than you, also trying to get hired by you.
- no, I don't ram my style down anyone's throat. In a project I want all code that is checked in to be in one style, that is all. So if you want to use your own style and your IDE supports displaying it in that style but does not modify the format of the lines of code that you did no touch and allows CVS to do its work, then go nuts.
my solution isn't useless... it COMPELTELY solves the problem. if you don't have enough resources to implement the solution then don't complain about your lack of ability....
- your 'solution' is completely useless because it is not practical in any way shape or form, your argument is similar to this: to solve all our energy problems all we have to do is invent a perpetuum mobile (perpetual motion machine, and never mind the thermodynamics, so if you do not have enough 'resources' to implement this amazing solution then don't complain about your lack of ability.
very odd to ask why you are flamebait AFTER i point out that someone else thought you were, and also why i thought you were...
- now I wonder, which one of us speaks English as the second language? (Fourth actually?) If you think that was a question directed to you, and right after it the answer is provided (as with many rhetorical questions, which it also was) then I have to wonder about your ability to shape and order your own thoughts.
The correct solution is to remove the source of the problem, not to fight the symptoms. Unfortunately that is not what people understand, fighting symptoms is more direct but it does not remove the problem.
Pork spending is only but a small part of the entire problem and people like Lieberman need to be fought on a completely different level, they need to be removed from the office. Their entire agenda is suspect, they cannot be trusted because of their complete lack of interest in anything but the corporate agenda, which is really their own agenda since it makes them the most money. Every single thing Lieberman or someone like him does is done for their direct or implied profit. My solution covers all aspects of this problem, you propose to fight a symptom in a absolutely impossible manner and you are adamant that it is a practical solution, it is amazing.
What I do for a living also has nothing to do with any of this or are you looking for more vectors for personal attacks? You can figure out what I do for a living easily, if you don't see it, well, I already said that your solutions are not practical, maybe it is just a reflection of the rest of your persona.
How long are you planning to continue with this particular thread anyway? It is not really a very practical exercise, don't you see? I don't think you are interested in learning anything and from my perspective this thread became redundant a while ago.
You provide no solution, your solution is useless, it can never work for a large project where many people need to be involved and infrastructure has to be provided, and it is a waste of time simply by the virtue of the project being government issued make shift pork generator.
My solution is real - get rid of the people who are with the establishment and more importantly reform the process not to allow the corporations to take over again by infusing their own resources into the voting process. That in your opinion is less effective than people undercutting a seasoned politician with some corporations behind them who want the contract in their home state? Your 'solution' is amazing in its ineffectiveness at every level - from trying to actually move the project away from the senator who introduces the idea, to the attempt of creating a large solution by yourself. Given one would want to stop all pork spending, what are the chances of succeeding by doing this? They are less than 0. You are trying to support your points with ad-hominem, non-sequitirs, begging questions, etc. Certainly you display all attributes of a troll.
Why am I voted 'Flamebait'? That's simple - supposedly Lieberman is a Democrat, but it is really irrelevant, the relevant part is that he is simply a corporatist, but on this site many people are 'progressive' technocrats and they don't understand subtlety of this, so they go with the obvious: someone is attacking a supposed 'Democrat' and they react.
- you can 'woosh' me all you want, sarcasm does not follow in your case, from a single word given with no context. Statement 'heresy' can is very ambiguous, if you don't think so: vagina.
Why? Everything that happens in sequence is equally indented in my code.
- it just looks troubled, what can I say, like something subtle is wrong, but it's hard to pinpoint, sort of like some part of brain needs to turn off in order not to gauge the eyes out while looking at it.
Also, it wouldn't match up with Python's indenting then, would it?
- I don't care, I don't do python day to day and if I did I would still use the correct K&R indentation.
If it bugs you so much, set your IDE to fix it. That's one of the benefits of smarter software - for such minor things, we can all do whatever works for us.
- yeah, good luck with that on my projects, someone with that attitude wouldn't be in the team for too long. If everyone changes the format to what they like all the time, CVS would not be useful to see the real code differences clearly because the entire file would change too often.
Incorrect, I am saying your statement is not the case, of-course at first it seemed that you were failing in reading comprehension, now I think it is simply a case of trolling.
Slashdot Mirror
oh, that's easy: you are a duche, which is like a small insignificant wrinkled douche. See, now we have a pretty good description of what you look like. Small and wrinkled - duche. /. figured you out just right, but I still think you are a scared little anonymous coward little wrinkled duche, with no discernible skills, you can't even use your mother tongue better than a foreigner, who learned the damn language.
muhaha, define irony:
i see it is fear that drives you.
- said Anonymous Coward. The 'o' is missing cause you don't deserve the full spelling, you are bit less than a full douche.
he has just been split into millions alright.
Oh, the trollish automaton is back I see. So your excuse for being a duche bag is that you are constantly drunk? Well, that makes sense.
my method is even simpler, I don't drink.
Too bad some languages are UTF-8 and not accepted by the silly /. filter. Oh well, the entities still say it all:
paste the entity text into the second box and click 'verify', that'll spit out the sentiment exactly.
I am now witnessing a degradation, whether I am talking to a computer program or a human, in either case, the observation is that this entity has descended into the lowest state of getting ready to throw feces at the opponent. This is the de-evolution, degradation, supposedly a higher entity moving down to reflect the lowest standard of communication. You are now something of a monkey.
You don't like my English?
, .
Peut-etre tu preferais parler au tongue royal, je ne pense pas que tu are prete pour ce, parce que tu est un tete de noeud, salope.
Now you are talking to yourself. Not only you are a broken computer program, you are also a schizophrenic.
Now I think I maybe talking to an automaton, who is running in an infinite loop. 'Stupid' - is that the best they programmed you with? You are a broken machine, a faulty computer, an incorrect algorithm and it is sad.
you think that something that exists in front of your eyes is unimaginable... perhaps you don't know what it means to be able to imagine something. if not, you were instigating argument... so again, you are pointing out exactly why you are wrong seemingly to prove why you think you aren't wrong. you are stupid.
- every conversation is about instigating an argument, otherwise what is the point of a conversation? But that is a rhetorical question, and as we have demonstrated an a few occasions here, you do not posses the intelligence to parse out such complexities of the language, which is ironic, supposedly you are the one with the native grasp of this tongue in this dialog. However it has long ceased being a dialog and most likely it never were, it is simply a diatribe.
'completely' and 'totally' - excellent trolling and a double proof of the comment to which you are directing your response.
since you were the first one to complain about my logic, my intellect etc., I suggest you do this yourself, so that I can summarily dismiss all of your claims in about half a sentence. Good luck with all of that.
if the money is worthless, the spending is irrelevant.
- this does not follow from anything, money is becoming worthless by government printing it, by not having trade balanced. However the money is not worthless as long as you can buy food / energy / shelter with them and as long as you are willing to work for it. The worthlessness of the money will come later, when the rest of the world will stop providing US with more debt by buying treasuries and when they call on the debt.
your point seems to be that the dam is sure to break, so there is no point trying to fix it, but we should still buy more and more paste to stick in the holes for a little while. then if someone points out how silly it is, rhetorically state the above as if it justifys everything.
- financially the dam is braking, politically you can do something about it to mitigate the consequences now, rather than witnessing a collapse of yet another country, besides which citizen of the US is willing to do nothing at all and go through the collapse without even trying? Maybe you are, are you really a good representative of the population though? I think it is unlikely.
the pure definition of flamebait...
- when I see someone stating that something is a 'pure definitions', I know I am dealing with either an idiot or a religious fanatic (very close things in my book) - now you see, that was a flamebait. What I said about Lieberman is not, it is my opinion, which you may disagree with and you may hate, but it was never a flamebait.
If your premises are wrong I am wrong? I see, I hope your work is not in software development, your logic is not, what I'd call 'impeccable'.
'The fed' is a corporate whore as a whole as much as most of its parts. The rest of your post is nonsense and non-sequitur since it never follows the premises, which are wrong in themselves.
As I said, new politicians have about 2 years to be corrupted by the system, so the system needs a more swift kick to be updated with a reform of election financing and voting out the establishment. It has started now and will not take 1000 years. AFAIC the US financially is destroyed and is in motion only by the force of inertia. The US dollar will collapse due to imbalance of trade and an enormous debt, and the situation will be triggered by a failure on some of the derivatives traded in the financial market. What happened in 2009 will happen again but on a more total scale. After that there could be a war and a clean slate supposedly, but I don't read the future, I just see similarities to the histories of the past. You will have your reforms and changes one way or another. It would be better for you to have it done by voting.
you start with a 'genius' and end with the 'stupid'. I guess that's the crux of the problem, I am looking at the issues, you are looking for something else altogether, I call it trolling.
People put Lieberman to power as much as corporate cash put him to power, let's see how this plays out next time in his state. 'People' will not get any benefit from him in his state, now corporations will, 'people' will see it this time.
Bill Halter - lieutenant governor of Arkansas has declared he is going to be running against Blanche Lincoln, who is a Democrat but she has done everything to represent corporate interests.
Obama is going to defend Blanche Lincoln, because he also is a corporatist who does not want any reform.
Blanche Lincoln is a corporatist, who took corporate money and for example voted against the public option in your country.
Bill Halter is not of-course a non-politician, he will not come and change everything, he'll become corrupt in a couple of years, but that's because everyone else in Washington is corrupt. That's why every corporatist whore needs to be voted out and replaced with new people, this way with all new people, it should be really possible to run reforms to fix the problems.
Peter Schiff is running in Connecticut where Chris Dodd, the 'Democrat' and really a corporatist used to be a senator. Of-course Dodd just quit being senator to become a lobbyist, so he'll cash in on his implied bribes from the corporations he represented. Schiff is a libertarian, never mind he runs as a Republican, his father is imprisoned for working against IRS and showing people how not to pay taxes.
Scott Brown won in a Democratic state, an amazing NOBODY that he is, but look, he just voted against Republicans for the 'jobs bill' (not that I agree with make shift government projects, but...)
Yes, it is possible to change the establishment by removing the corporatists and it does not take 1000 years and inventing a perpetual motion machine.
as I said, reform the process of how the politicians communicate with corporations, outlaw corporate donations, provide people, who collected enough signatures with some funding so they don't have to market themselves to the lobbyists and the corporations, but only have to concentrate on their work. This is a huge problem - corporate money going for or against a politician and it is legal in your country. Everything else is noise.
Heresy is a very strong word.
- sure, but it is not in itself a sarcastic remark in any way that is explicit.
The sarcasm is derived from the assumption of using Python (a young language) as the accepted standard rather than C. (the older language)
- well, that's deep, I give it to you, but it is deep in your head, it is not at all visible, if you wanted to be actually understood, you could have made it more explicit that this was your attempt at 'sarcasm'. Also it's Thompson, not K or R.
Let me see, how would I do sarcasm in this case?
---
I know why there is this new language now, forget about everything else, Ken just wanted to make a point of the correct style of opening braces and he came up with a language that does not allow you to do any different!
- Ken wanted to make a point of 'the correct style'? As if he ever created a language or anything else that set any precedents of standards the way Python does. Heresy!
---
Ok, so maybe the above can be identified as a sarcasm and the link to the comparative age of B to Python is not only in my own head but also is somewhere, where it can be seen on the page. Unless you believe that what you type into the forum and what is in your head are equivalent?
The great thing about standards, of course, is that there are so many of them. I consider code's readability and it is for me related to the manner in which the code is displayed, and the style that I find the most practical as well as pleasing to the eye is K&R variant. So this is the main point of contention here.
If you want to ram your favourite style down your team's throats, and discriminate against other coders simply because you're set in your ways... then go ahead. Not my problem. It's not yours either - it's only a problem for the guy with a different opinion than you, also trying to get hired by you.
- no, I don't ram my style down anyone's throat. In a project I want all code that is checked in to be in one style, that is all. So if you want to use your own style and your IDE supports displaying it in that style but does not modify the format of the lines of code that you did no touch and allows CVS to do its work, then go nuts.
my solution isn't useless... it COMPELTELY solves the problem. if you don't have enough resources to implement the solution then don't complain about your lack of ability....
- your 'solution' is completely useless because it is not practical in any way shape or form, your argument is similar to this: to solve all our energy problems all we have to do is invent a perpetuum mobile (perpetual motion machine, and never mind the thermodynamics, so if you do not have enough 'resources' to implement this amazing solution then don't complain about your lack of ability.
very odd to ask why you are flamebait AFTER i point out that someone else thought you were, and also why i thought you were...
- now I wonder, which one of us speaks English as the second language? (Fourth actually?) If you think that was a question directed to you, and right after it the answer is provided (as with many rhetorical questions, which it also was) then I have to wonder about your ability to shape and order your own thoughts.
The correct solution is to remove the source of the problem, not to fight the symptoms. Unfortunately that is not what people understand, fighting symptoms is more direct but it does not remove the problem.
Pork spending is only but a small part of the entire problem and people like Lieberman need to be fought on a completely different level, they need to be removed from the office. Their entire agenda is suspect, they cannot be trusted because of their complete lack of interest in anything but the corporate agenda, which is really their own agenda since it makes them the most money. Every single thing Lieberman or someone like him does is done for their direct or implied profit. My solution covers all aspects of this problem, you propose to fight a symptom in a absolutely impossible manner and you are adamant that it is a practical solution, it is amazing.
What I do for a living also has nothing to do with any of this or are you looking for more vectors for personal attacks? You can figure out what I do for a living easily, if you don't see it, well, I already said that your solutions are not practical, maybe it is just a reflection of the rest of your persona.
How long are you planning to continue with this particular thread anyway? It is not really a very practical exercise, don't you see? I don't think you are interested in learning anything and from my perspective this thread became redundant a while ago.
You provide no solution, your solution is useless, it can never work for a large project where many people need to be involved and infrastructure has to be provided, and it is a waste of time simply by the virtue of the project being government issued make shift pork generator.
My solution is real - get rid of the people who are with the establishment and more importantly reform the process not to allow the corporations to take over again by infusing their own resources into the voting process. That in your opinion is less effective than people undercutting a seasoned politician with some corporations behind them who want the contract in their home state? Your 'solution' is amazing in its ineffectiveness at every level - from trying to actually move the project away from the senator who introduces the idea, to the attempt of creating a large solution by yourself. Given one would want to stop all pork spending, what are the chances of succeeding by doing this? They are less than 0. You are trying to support your points with ad-hominem, non-sequitirs, begging questions, etc. Certainly you display all attributes of a troll.
Why am I voted 'Flamebait'? That's simple - supposedly Lieberman is a Democrat, but it is really irrelevant, the relevant part is that he is simply a corporatist, but on this site many people are 'progressive' technocrats and they don't understand subtlety of this, so they go with the obvious: someone is attacking a supposed 'Democrat' and they react.
*woosh*
It was sarcasm.
- you can 'woosh' me all you want, sarcasm does not follow in your case, from a single word given with no context. Statement 'heresy' can is very ambiguous, if you don't think so: vagina.
Why? Everything that happens in sequence is equally indented in my code.
- it just looks troubled, what can I say, like something subtle is wrong, but it's hard to pinpoint, sort of like some part of brain needs to turn off in order not to gauge the eyes out while looking at it.
Also, it wouldn't match up with Python's indenting then, would it?
- I don't care, I don't do python day to day and if I did I would still use the correct K&R indentation.
If it bugs you so much, set your IDE to fix it. That's one of the benefits of smarter software - for such minor things, we can all do whatever works for us.
- yeah, good luck with that on my projects, someone with that attitude wouldn't be in the team for too long. If everyone changes the format to what they like all the time, CVS would not be useful to see the real code differences clearly because the entire file would change too often.
Incorrect, I am saying your statement is not the case, of-course at first it seemed that you were failing in reading comprehension, now I think it is simply a case of trolling.
muhaha, well now, in this language there is only one correct way, every other way will be a compiler error, so it's not true for this language.
Wow, I think you have just conclusively proven that idea once and for all. ONCE AND FOR ALL!