FreePascal is an cross platform opensource version of the language.
I haven't tried it because I like Borlands IDE and reliability and only need Windows support, however I hear FreePascal has nearly all of the Delphi language implimented.
Other projects are working on the IDE/Form designer aspect
Yes, because you had a recoverable spinal injury, clearly every spinal injury must be recoverable and we don't need stem cell research.
Congratulations on your work and achievement, I'm going to assume that the way "recovering on your own is passable and I am an example of that. " reads under this context of stem cell research was not how you intended it, because I utterly loath people that make the 'I did, therefore everybody else could' argument.
"Insane reliance, eh? And you propose what as a replacement? We still don't have any scalable, safe solutions for burning hydrogen (not to mention that burning (e.g. oxydizing) hydrogen creates water vapor, which is a far more efficient greenhouse gas than CO2); wind power isn't sufficient on its own (but not a bad start); coal still isn't all that clean, though it's better than it was; nuclear waste would be fairly reasonable to deal with, but no one wants it in their back-yard; fusion isn't practical yet; solar panels require MASSIVE footprint and are weather-sensitive....
Coal is a fossile fuel, burning that for energy is no different from burning oil.
Water vapor just condenses as rain, so I'm not sure what your issue there is, but hydrogen fuel is positioned as a way of storing energy, not a source of energy.
There are plenty of scaleable aternatives, for instance rapeseed or algy can be used to produce carbon nuetral fuel that any diesel engine can run on. Slashdot even ran an article suggesting that if scaled to the size of the oil industry, the economics of scale would make algy based fuels no more expensive than fossile fuels.
The problem is we have all the infrastructure already in place to just use oil, which makes it very cheap, plus it's already there in the ground, which makes it "free" in a fucked economic model. Also a lot of very powerful people are making a lot of money in the petrolium industry, and will do their best to impede any switch to alternatives.
The idea that we should not give up essential liberty to secure temporary safety is a pointless tautology thanks to his use of the words 'essential' vs 'temporary'. These words also make the quote thoroughly unapplicable to every situation I have seen it applied to so far.
Plus, as parent poster points out, there is no logical connection between someone making the trade and therefor deserving neither.
Let it die.
Make your arguments stand on merit, not emotive crap.
Before Win2k, reliability was what everybody complained about, blue screens of death, constant crashing, runing out of resources, that sort of thing.
Microsoft listened, claimed reliability was their priority, and eventually released Win2k which fixed all of those problems. Win2k has crashed on me all of 3 times while using it both at work and at home for nearly five years, twice due to worn out CPU fans, and once due to hard drive failure. So while my experience is anecdotal I must say Win2k was an incredible success - more than I thought was possible from that company, it certainly changed my view of Microsoft.
Fast forward a few years (2002 - 2003ish), BSODs are now a thing of the past, leaving the increasing viruses and malware as the #1 headache on Windows.
Microsoft listens, claims security is now their #1 priority...
Will their security push be as effective as their stability push? only time will tell, but after the magic they worked with Win2k I'm no longer putting it above them.
Personally I care little, Windows boxes I've had connected to the internet for years without a virus checker are still clean. It appears Windows viruses so far have been limited to inexperienced users and boxes that aren't behind a proper firewall.
In the case of Megafauna, one reason it's bad is because the world is cooler with them around.
An animal that can run so fast it could get a speeding ticket on a motorway is down to a population of 3000.
When all our megafauna is reduced to pages in a book like dinosaurs, woolly mammoths, sabre tooth tigers, Haast Eagles etc, don't you think we will have lost something?
I've always thought it's a pity there's no other species around with our kind of intelligence, but imagine how much more suck it would be if rather than being the only intelligent species on the planet, we were the only significant species.
Nuclear power - only feasible due to goverment subsidies
Wind power
And now I get to add biodiesel to the list. (I guess biodiesel is really just an organic solar panel anyway)
You know what, in every instance it's a myth, every one of those produces significantly more energy over its lifespan than it takes to manufacture - with the possible exception of a solar panel in the arctic.
Come on people, did none of the engineers realise that the hydro dam would cost more than it would produce? The wind farm? The algy pools? Did they need some slashdotter to come along and explain it to them.
Ever since the idea came about of corporate e-mail being fair game for federal and state law enforcement to use, not to mention litigation-happy civil trial lawyers, I've by default said zip, zero, nada in e-mails or on IM that would be of any use regarding anything I do at work
Instead of worrying about what you put in your email, why not just do your job in an ethical, legal, and responsible manner?
That way your email will be evidence you can use in your defense.
Natural selection is not a life or death selector, an organism can both survive and breed yet still have its genes slowly edged out over generations by the propagation of others.
Many posters seem to be of the opinion that because we live a cushy world where sick people aren't left to be eaten by wildlife, that evolution will stall. This view is wrong, but first off I'd like to say, who cares - evolution will never affect you or me, and we have no moral duty to aid it.
Anyway, you want an example of selective pressure in Western society... beauty. Natural selection was one selective mechanism darwin proposed, sexual selection is another.
And like natural selection, sexual selection isn't some black and white litmus test of "did you get to breed before you died" - what matters is who you got to breed with. Perhaps you were ugly and obnoxious and didn't have much choice of partners so ending up breeding with someone also less desireable but for different reasons, combining two sets of undesirable genes in your offspring... which many generations in the future may result in your genes finding themselves in a stagnating part of the pool, having picked up hereditary disabilities and other undesireable genes like a snowball over the generations. Meanwhile the genes of somebody who had more choice of partner has propegated more widely throughout the species.
The origin of life - evolution says nothing of the origin of life.
Natural selection - natural selection is one of several selection mechanisms Darwin proposed, but there is more to the theory of evolution than just the selection mechanisms (causes of variance for example)
Survival of the fittest - this isn't even natural selection let alone evolution. Natural selection is not a life or death selector, an organism can both survive and breed yet still have its genes slowly edged out over generations by the propagation of others. I don't know where "Survival of the fittest" came from, Darwin never said it. Eugenics maybe?
Darwinism - Darwinism is an explanation of how evolution works, it's a damn fine one and has stood the test of time, but if tomorrow we found out it was wrong we would still know evolution as fact - it's something we can and have observed happening even if Darwinism turns out to not explain it. Granted, Darwisim/theory-of-evolution is often what we mean by evolution, but it's still important to know that the evidence for evolution happening can stand regardless of our theory on mechanics behind it.
Evolution is simply the idea that species changed/adapted/diverged slowly over time from a common ancester.
And speaking of common ancesters, there's also that myth that evolution claims we're descended from monkeys, I reckon that one gets propagated deliberately.
With all the misinformation floating about the place, it's a wonder anybody believes it, though I guess when you look at what "the other side" is pushing... When did "designed" start implying only one designer?
Microsoft are already very careful about not transmitting information from your machine without your consent. Why does everybody on/. suddenly think the availability of extra logging information will change that policy?
But if "Microsoft isn't like that, mmkay" doesn't cut the mustard with you, why not read the article:
"the choice of whether to send the data, and how much information to share, will be up to the individual."
"Do you assume that the user always wants to print color or b/w? Landscape or Portrait? Legal or Letter?
I honestly blame Microsoft for making people THINK that computers require no input from the user"
Allow them to specify those things when they go to print a document, not when they plug in a printer.
The only thing that should happen when you plug in a printer is the computer gives you some sort of thumbs-up indication a printer was just plugged in, and everything's ready to go.
So my SSID is an email address, if any of my neighbours get wifi and can see my AP then they can email me, allowing cooperation and sharing of the password.
Hard to cooperate when you have no idea who's the network is.
No, it started off with drivel too. Alien races that can recieve binary communication but can't conceive/convert from raster to vector (his example), the idea that orientation is important enough that getting it wrong will destroy the message yet the aliens are too stupid to analyse all 4 orientations.
If that was a slashdot post I wouldn't even mod it +1 insightful.
Arguing about natural selection is a bit of a red herring - it shouldn't be confused with evolution. Natural selecton is one mechanism we've identified at work in evolution, there are others we know about, and probably many we don't.
Even if natural selection turned to be false and not a part of evolution, evolution still stands up on its own evidence.
The origin of life we don't know, the mechanisms behind evolution we think we mostly know - jury's still out. That evolution happenes we do know, there is just so much cohesive consistent evidence supporting it and not a thing to suggest otherwise.
Evolution is observable, where do you think all these new diseases are coming from? The process is not just possible, it's already used in industry, see genetic algorithms.
Sure, evolution slows as organisms get more complex and generation spans get longer, but things like whale skeletons having leg bones offer other clues.
Sounds like you've been taught the Christian strawman version of evolution.
I'm baffled too, it's almost as if God was born and raised in some land-locked southern state and it never occurred to Him that Sweden might have its own coastline.
The UN general assembly was against the continuing of those sanctions, the UN guy overseeing them (Denis Halliday) eventually called it genocide and resigned.
You see, to end the sanctions (or alter them) required a new security council resolution be passed, and the UK and the US (both with veto power) were having none of that.
The food for oil program was set up so that the UK and US could delay indefinity any goods they felt like, or outright veto as dual use. Halliday used the word "genocide" (implying a deliberate act) to describe the program because of the US/UK gross abuse of this veto. Hans von Sponeck, and Scott Ritter also used the word.
My personal belief is the goal wasn't genocide but rather to create so much death and suffering in Iraq that the people would rise against Saddam and overthrow him themselves.
It might have been Clinton rather than Bush, but the Iraqi deaths due to sanctions still lie at the feet of America (and the UK), the UN was an unwilling accessory.
Here's a CNN interview on the sanctions, it predates 9/11 so doesn't carry all Bush's war baggage. http://edition.cnn.com/COMMUNITY/transcr ipts/2001/ 01/16/halliday/
Alternatively you could google for Denis Halliday and genocide, or pull up a list of the medicine they prevented from entering Iraq.
Yes, but only because the Swedish border with Mexico is so heavily guarded.
FWIW other developed nations have a problem with illegal immigrants, in Australia it's even an election issue - and they're an island continent!
The US is one of the few (only?) developed nations to directly share a border with a 3rd world nation, that is the reason there are so many people trying to sneak in.
So at 30 billion tonnes per year into an atmosphere of 1800 billion tonnes... that's a 16% man-made increase in atmospheric CO2 over 1 decade, except this sort of thing has been going on in various amounts since the industrial revolution.
Sure CO2 levels are naturally cyclic, sure we might just happen to be on a peak, but current atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are above 370 parts per million, that's higher than any level ever recorded from an ice core, ~30% higher than any peak the natural cycle has ever produced, and over 150000 years it just co-incidently happens to be occurring while we spit out 30 billion tonnes of it a year.
Don't kid yourself, you're not kicking the sacred cow because you're smart or know something others don't, you're kicking it because you don't want to have to change your views or your way of life.
Yeah, my flatmate fell for that one for a while too.
http://www.thebody.com/amfar/krim.html
Many thoroughly debunked theories are still convincing when you only read one side of them. (take for example all the evidence we never sent a man to the moon)
Ahhh yes, when the citizens of France and Germany overwhelmingly supported giving the weapons inspectors the time they had actually asked for instead of jumping straight to war (81% in Germany), the corrupt goverment leaders were infact bribed by Saddam to ignore the overwhelming anti-war sentiment of their citizens, and instead not go to war.
Slashdot Mirror
FreePascal is an cross platform opensource version of the language.
I haven't tried it because I like Borlands IDE and reliability and only need Windows support, however I hear FreePascal has nearly all of the Delphi language implimented.
Other projects are working on the IDE/Form designer aspect
Yes, because you had a recoverable spinal injury, clearly every spinal injury must be recoverable and we don't need stem cell research.
Congratulations on your work and achievement, I'm going to assume that the way "recovering on your own is passable and I am an example of that.
" reads under this context of stem cell research was not how you intended it, because I utterly loath people that make the 'I did, therefore everybody else could' argument.
Water vapor just condenses as rain, so I'm not sure what your issue there is, but hydrogen fuel is positioned as a way of storing energy, not a source of energy.
There are plenty of scaleable aternatives, for instance rapeseed or algy can be used to produce carbon nuetral fuel that any diesel engine can run on. Slashdot even ran an article suggesting that if scaled to the size of the oil industry, the economics of scale would make algy based fuels no more expensive than fossile fuels.
The problem is we have all the infrastructure already in place to just use oil, which makes it very cheap, plus it's already there in the ground, which makes it "free" in a fucked economic model. Also a lot of very powerful people are making a lot of money in the petrolium industry, and will do their best to impede any switch to alternatives.
So when you ask "why does it do it that way?", the answer often starts with a description of how computers used to be used 30 years ago.
I would mod you up if I could.
The idea that we should not give up essential liberty to secure temporary safety is a pointless tautology thanks to his use of the words 'essential' vs 'temporary'. These words also make the quote thoroughly unapplicable to every situation I have seen it applied to so far.
Plus, as parent poster points out, there is no logical connection between someone making the trade and therefor deserving neither.
Let it die.
Make your arguments stand on merit, not emotive crap.
Dude, that restricts the protocol required to access the records, it has nothing to do with the ISPs keeping them.
Removing all unneccesary whitespace and replacing var and function names with 1 or 2 letter replacements is also a means of compression.
Open source languages are not designed to only be used on open source projects, restricting what it can be used for goes against the whole point.
Besides, nobody has a problem with GCC producing output without embedded data to make it reversable.
They've got security confused with reliability.
Before Win2k, reliability was what everybody complained about, blue screens of death, constant crashing, runing out of resources, that sort of thing.
Microsoft listened, claimed reliability was their priority, and eventually released Win2k which fixed all of those problems. Win2k has crashed on me all of 3 times while using it both at work and at home for nearly five years, twice due to worn out CPU fans, and once due to hard drive failure. So while my experience is anecdotal I must say Win2k was an incredible success - more than I thought was possible from that company, it certainly changed my view of Microsoft.
Fast forward a few years (2002 - 2003ish), BSODs are now a thing of the past, leaving the increasing viruses and malware as the #1 headache on Windows.
Microsoft listens, claims security is now their #1 priority...
Will their security push be as effective as their stability push? only time will tell, but after the magic they worked with Win2k I'm no longer putting it above them.
Personally I care little, Windows boxes I've had connected to the internet for years without a virus checker are still clean. It appears Windows viruses so far have been limited to inexperienced users and boxes that aren't behind a proper firewall.
In the case of Megafauna, one reason it's bad is because the world is cooler with them around.
An animal that can run so fast it could get a speeding ticket on a motorway is down to a population of 3000.
When all our megafauna is reduced to pages in a book like dinosaurs, woolly mammoths, sabre tooth tigers, Haast Eagles etc, don't you think we will have lost something?
I've always thought it's a pity there's no other species around with our kind of intelligence, but imagine how much more suck it would be if rather than being the only intelligent species on the planet, we were the only significant species.
Megafauna is on our level, people connect to it.
I have heard this exact same claim made of of
- Solar panels
- Hydro dams - they silt up and become unusable
- Nuclear power - only feasible due to goverment subsidies
- Wind power
And now I get to add biodiesel to the list.(I guess biodiesel is really just an organic solar panel anyway)
You know what, in every instance it's a myth, every one of those produces significantly more energy over its lifespan than it takes to manufacture - with the possible exception of a solar panel in the arctic.
Come on people, did none of the engineers realise that the hydro dam would cost more than it would produce? The wind farm? The algy pools? Did they need some slashdotter to come along and explain it to them.
That way your email will be evidence you can use in your defense.
Natural selection is not a life or death selector, an organism can both survive and breed yet still have its genes slowly edged out over generations by the propagation of others.
Many posters seem to be of the opinion that because we live a cushy world where sick people aren't left to be eaten by wildlife, that evolution will stall. This view is wrong, but first off I'd like to say, who cares - evolution will never affect you or me, and we have no moral duty to aid it.
Anyway, you want an example of selective pressure in Western society... beauty.
Natural selection was one selective mechanism darwin proposed, sexual selection is another.
And like natural selection, sexual selection isn't some black and white litmus test of "did you get to breed before you died" - what matters is who you got to breed with. Perhaps you were ugly and obnoxious and didn't have much choice of partners so ending up breeding with someone also less desireable but for different reasons, combining two sets of undesirable genes in your offspring... which many generations in the future may result in your genes finding themselves in a stagnating part of the pool, having picked up hereditary disabilities and other undesireable genes like a snowball over the generations. Meanwhile the genes of somebody who had more choice of partner has propegated more widely throughout the species.
- The origin of life - evolution says nothing of the origin of life.
- Natural selection - natural selection is one of several selection mechanisms Darwin proposed, but there is more to the theory of evolution than just the selection mechanisms (causes of variance for example)
- Survival of the fittest - this isn't even natural selection let alone evolution. Natural selection is not a life or death selector, an organism can both survive and breed yet still have its genes slowly edged out over generations by the propagation of others. I don't know where "Survival of the fittest" came from, Darwin never said it. Eugenics maybe?
- Darwinism - Darwinism is an explanation of how evolution works, it's a damn fine one and has stood the test of time, but if tomorrow we found out it was wrong we would still know evolution as fact - it's something we can and have observed happening even if Darwinism turns out to not explain it.
Evolution is simply the idea that species changed/adapted/diverged slowly over time from a common ancester.Granted, Darwisim/theory-of-evolution is often what we mean by evolution, but it's still important to know that the evidence for evolution happening can stand regardless of our theory on mechanics behind it.
And speaking of common ancesters, there's also that myth that evolution claims we're descended from monkeys, I reckon that one gets propagated deliberately.
With all the misinformation floating about the place, it's a wonder anybody believes it, though I guess when you look at what "the other side" is pushing...
When did "designed" start implying only one designer?
But if "Microsoft isn't like that, mmkay" doesn't cut the mustard with you, why not read the article:
Allow them to specify those things when they go to print a document, not when they plug in a printer.
The only thing that should happen when you plug in a printer is the computer gives you some sort of thumbs-up indication a printer was just plugged in, and everything's ready to go.
Yeah, I'm worried about bandwidth.
So my SSID is an email address, if any of my neighbours get wifi and can see my AP then they can email me, allowing cooperation and sharing of the password.
Hard to cooperate when you have no idea who's the network is.
No, it started off with drivel too. Alien races that can recieve binary communication but can't conceive/convert from raster to vector (his example), the idea that orientation is important enough that getting it wrong will destroy the message yet the aliens are too stupid to analyse all 4 orientations.
If that was a slashdot post I wouldn't even mod it +1 insightful.
Arguing about natural selection is a bit of a red herring - it shouldn't be confused with evolution. Natural selecton is one mechanism we've identified at work in evolution, there are others we know about, and probably many we don't.
Even if natural selection turned to be false and not a part of evolution, evolution still stands up on its own evidence.
The origin of life we don't know, the mechanisms behind evolution we think we mostly know - jury's still out. That evolution happenes we do know, there is just so much cohesive consistent evidence supporting it and not a thing to suggest otherwise.
Evolution is observable, where do you think all these new diseases are coming from? The process is not just possible, it's already used in industry, see genetic algorithms.
Sure, evolution slows as organisms get more complex and generation spans get longer, but things like whale skeletons having leg bones offer other clues.
Sounds like you've been taught the Christian strawman version of evolution.
I'm baffled too, it's almost as if God was born and raised in some land-locked southern state and it never occurred to Him that Sweden might have its own coastline.
It's probably a joke.
The UN general assembly was against the continuing of those sanctions, the UN guy overseeing them (Denis Halliday) eventually called it genocide and resigned.
r ipts/2001/ 01/16/halliday/
You see, to end the sanctions (or alter them) required a new security council resolution be passed, and the UK and the US (both with veto power) were having none of that.
The food for oil program was set up so that the UK and US could delay indefinity any goods they felt like, or outright veto as dual use. Halliday used the word "genocide" (implying a deliberate act) to describe the program because of the US/UK gross abuse of this veto. Hans von Sponeck, and Scott Ritter also used the word.
My personal belief is the goal wasn't genocide but rather to create so much death and suffering in Iraq that the people would rise against Saddam and overthrow him themselves.
It might have been Clinton rather than Bush, but the Iraqi deaths due to sanctions still lie at the feet of America (and the UK), the UN was an unwilling accessory.
Here's a CNN interview on the sanctions, it predates 9/11 so doesn't carry all Bush's war baggage.
http://edition.cnn.com/COMMUNITY/transc
Alternatively you could google for Denis Halliday and genocide, or pull up a list of the medicine they prevented from entering Iraq.
Yes, but only because the Swedish border with Mexico is so heavily guarded.
FWIW other developed nations have a problem with illegal immigrants, in Australia it's even an election issue - and they're an island continent!
The US is one of the few (only?) developed nations to directly share a border with a 3rd world nation, that is the reason there are so many people trying to sneak in.
So at 30 billion tonnes per year into an atmosphere of 1800 billion tonnes... that's a 16% man-made increase in atmospheric CO2 over 1 decade, except this sort of thing has been going on in various amounts since the industrial revolution.
C yc le/carbon_cycle4.html
Sure CO2 levels are naturally cyclic, sure we might just happen to be on a peak, but current atmospheric carbon dioxide levels are above 370 parts per million, that's higher than any level ever recorded from an ice core, ~30% higher than any peak the natural cycle has ever produced, and over 150000 years it just co-incidently happens to be occurring while we spit out 30 billion tonnes of it a year.
Don't kid yourself, you're not kicking the sacred cow because you're smart or know something others don't, you're kicking it because you don't want to have to change your views or your way of life.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Library/Carbon
Yeah, my flatmate fell for that one for a while too.
http://www.thebody.com/amfar/krim.html
Many thoroughly debunked theories are still convincing when you only read one side of them.
(take for example all the evidence we never sent a man to the moon)
Ahhh yes, when the citizens of France and Germany overwhelmingly supported giving the weapons inspectors the time they had actually asked for instead of jumping straight to war (81% in Germany), the corrupt goverment leaders were infact bribed by Saddam to ignore the overwhelming anti-war sentiment of their citizens, and instead not go to war.
Only in [the minds of conservative] America.