Let's hope they're using a really small font size. Cause those holes are really distracting in the Wikipedia example. The main advantage to reading from paper is faster reading speed (and arguably, less eyestrain), but if you're constantly distracted by the weird font, you'll lose that. Of course, using a small font size in the first place would save more ink (and more paper, due to more words per page) than a gimmicky font.
You're defining communism, not socialism. Some level of redistribution exists in socialist societies, but lasted I checked, Richard Branson is still a billionaire. I'd ask the British. Or the Scandinavians. Maybe they can explain the difference between socialism and communism to you.
Personally, I would have let the auto guys fail, but hey, there is something to be said for maintaining some native manufacturing capability. Helped a lot in World War II. Several of the banks he salvaged are already paying back the money and being "denationalized", and in most cases, while the government had an ownership stake, it exercised no actual control over the banks. The taxes Obama has talked about raising are on those at a relatively high income; there is no clear evidence one way or the other for the effect of high marginal tax rates at the top of the spectrum, and anecdotal historical evidence shows that many of our periods of strongest economic growth coincided with local maxima in the tax rates. Not to be snide, but I've seen how little you need to get a degree in Economics, so forgive me if I ignore your appeal to expertise.
As for your final paragraph, that's one big [citation needed] right there. Most of those look like extremely loose paraphrases. On his behavior in his youth, I'm not inclined to give him too much crap; I went to college, and while I personally did virtually nothing that I'd be embarrassed to read about on the front page, I also saw enough to know that holding that against someone 20 years down the line is petty. BTW, "one Democrat" saying anything isn't all that persuasive unless they actually have a substantial amount of power. The Dems have nuts too, doesn't mean anyone listens to them.
Most projections have it lowering the cost of insurance, though some people that don't have it will be required to buy it. Given that we were subsidizing their ER trips anyway, I'm fine with that.
You have no idea what is constitutional. Like it or not, the scope of the commerce clause has been expanded through judicial decisions reaching back two hundred years. We give tax deductions for donating to charity to encourage charity; think of this as a tax increase that you can easily avoid by acquiring health insurance.
Were they forcing you to buy a house when they enacted the mortgage interest deduction? Forced you to buy a car when they created the cash-for-clunkers program? No.
The taxes being enacted are the "virtual" tax I described in point 2, which can be avoided by buying health care, plus applying the Medicare tax to investment income (which is taxed at a very low rate to start with). And there is no indication that moderately higher taxes would harm the economy in any event. The top marginal rate was 90% in the Eisenhower years, and it kicked in at a comparatively moderate income. Yet the 50s were an economic boom time. I'm not saying we bring back 90% rates, but taxing the highest earners at about 42% is not going to destroy the economy.
There is no serious suggestion that the Medicare spending cuts will be enacted. The budget projections for the plan show a substantially reduced deficit. And this is a very limited entitlement compared to previous "entitlements", in that the government is only subsidizing at the low end, not covering the whole tab.
At the low end, people are covered by Medicaid. At the lower-middle to middle, people have their health care subsidized. At the upper middle, you can afford health care, and not getting it just means that if you're one of the unlucky ones, whatever part of your ER bill you can't pay was being paid by the taxpayers and/or the responsible insured people at the same hospital. And at the very top; well, I guess if you're got millions in the bank you could always found your own insurance group and self-insure. Oh, and if, for some reason, you're in the merely subsidized group and *really* can't afford health care (as opposed to *really* not wanting to give up cable), then hey, you can pay a small additional tax that is lower than the cost of the insurance.
Frankly, you clearly have no understanding of the bill. The only legitimate complaint you have is that it does cost some people some money they might not have wanted to spend, but given that some of those same people would have ended up in an ER and paid the bill with taxpayer and insured people's money instead of their own, I'm not inclined to be sympathetic to free riders.
Which policies? The one where Obama sent soldiers to shut down Fox News? Or the one where Obama pushed through an amendment abolishing term limits? Perhaps the one where Obama nationalized the telephone, cement, electric, steel and oil industries? Enacted price controls on basic food stuffs, thereby leading to nationwide shortages? Wait, you're saying he did none of those things? Never even tried to do anything like them? Hmm... Clearly you know what you're talking about, so I'm sure I'm just missing the obviousness of your claim. Last I heard, he shepherded through an incredibly moderate set of health care reforms that Republicans had previously endorsed at various points reaching back thirty years. Continued the economic policies of his Republican predecessor to try and salvage an economy teetering on the brink. Proposed a few financial reforms that would increase marketplace transparency, allowing the free flow of information to *improve* the efficiency and safety of the market. But nevertheless, he must be a commie.
"Roughly" four in ten in favor of the legislation just passed. And six in ten in favor of the government involving itself in health care. Of course, the most useful statistics are buried near the end: "Three-fourths of respondents say the issue is so complex that it’s hard for the average American to understand the proposals that were debated. [...] Only 20 percent of those surveyed say the system is fine the way it is."
So 20% don't like it the way it is. 60% want the government to involve itself, and while only 40% approve (the article doesn't make clear how the disapprove/undecided split broke down), 75% admit they don't have a clue what was actually passed. Sure sounds like a stunning rejection of the bill. Oh wait, they don't know what they're rejecting, so the poll tells you jack shit.
What the hell is going on with/.'s moderation system? The parent post started with a +2 from Karma, a little while later it had jumped to +5, now it's down to +3. Okay, I understand, maybe someone disagreed and modded it down. Except the only mods I see are:
30% Informative
20% Insightful
20% Interesting
How did I start with +2, get (apparently) a +1 each for those three categories, and then drop to +3? I note that there is 30% left over, which might be a downmod that would cancel the Informative, but even then it should be +4. Can the mod system only show 3 moderations? Or is the system screwing with me? It doesn't matter much (I've got excellent and I'm in no danger of losing it), but I'm genuinely curious.
Technically, Britain is pretty darn socialist. And Chile turned totalitarian because the legitimately elected socialist government was overthrown by the military. Communism is impractical, yes, but socialism is fine in moderation. Don't conflate the two.
I've got no beef with socialism in general, but what Chavez is doing isn't socialism. I'm perpetually annoyed by socialism supporters like Sean Penn who defend Chavez, claiming he is not a dictator. I'm sorry, but taking over the media, rewriting the constitution to remove term limits so he can stay in power indefinitely and possibly attempting to assassinate the democratically elected president of a neighboring country (see the first link) are not the actions of a democratic leader. Combined with the allegations of vote fraud and voter suppression in opposition neighborhoods, the man has crossed that line that divides "pompous but legitimate ruler" from "dictator in all but name."
Just a note: TFA actually uses the correct word. Is it so hard for submitters to actually copy and paste the correct words when they are directly quoting in the first place?
I should point out that at least one educational theory agrees with this guy. A relative of mine once worked for one of the Waldorf Schools. While their high school education is mostly mainstream, their elementary school education is very different. Virtually no formal math or science training until age 8 or so, and they introduce reading a bit late as well. From my understanding (admittedly limited), they have a quasi-religious belief that children's souls aren't attached at birth, and only begin attaching around age 7 or so. Until then, you're better off training the body, not the mind, so they do a lot of work with arts and crafts instead of traditional core educational material. And no, the whole "soulless" thing doesn't mean they consider them evil or anything, they just believe that all people develop in this way.
I consider their beliefs nutty, but their graduates seem to do quite well. Maybe the nutty belief accidentally corresponds with the natural progression of a child's brain development?
They're still syntactic sugar. If you release a library with a publicly visible variable, then later decide to replace it with a property accessor, code that uses it still needs to be recompiled to byte code against the new library. If they don't, they'll try to access the now non-existent variable.
Don't get me wrong: If you control all software which uses this code, it makes it much easier to replace a variable with property because you don't need to change any other source code, but you still need to recompile everything that uses it, because that syntactic sugar is concealing the fact that the property compiles down a method call byte code, while the variable was being directly accessed.
Java apps usually use some OS specific stuff as well. Virtually every mainstream Java program uses an OS specific installer for instance. And if you're distributing a different installer for every platform, you may as well compile it for every platform.
As for C based desktop apps with cross-platform capabilities, might I point you in the direction of a little thing called Firefox? Yeah, it needs certain libraries coded differently for different platforms, but as noted, so does Java.
Technically, it probably didn't give him the password, just allow him to reset it. Using the lock analogy, it's like a locksmith agreeing to make new locks and keys for anyone who greets them by opening the door of the house; they don't check the ownership records and ID, they just assume that someone who was able to get into the house and hasn't been challenged has the right to change the locks.
Mod parent informative. There is a big difference between "My support of.NET was a mistake" and "Microsoft has limited a promising technology with vague patent threats".
Why is missing properties a bad thing? Properties are just syntactic sugar over getters and setters. They can do work under the hood, same as a getter or setter; very different from just making a variable public. It's just a readability difference; particularly when combining getters and setters on a single line, it's a lot easier to read: foo.fraction = bar.num / bar.den;
than it is to read: foo.setFraction(bar.getNum() / bar.getDen());
Contrived example, but an idiom that allows all assignment to be done via the equals operator makes for much more readable code. In Java, you can only do the more readable version by exposing the variables directly; in C#, you get all the implementation hiding of getters and setters with all the ease of use of a variable.
On the other hand, if he's reached the point where an upgrade to a VM language is necessary, C# supports more of the C++ style idioms than Java does, and would be a less drastic change. So it works both ways.
Personally, I wish C# shipped with classes matching Java's BigInteger (and similar) classes, if only because it would have made my college Crypto work that much easier. I implemented some number theory classes myself with operator overloading, but they were only toys, since they maxed out at 64-bit unsigned math. Yeah, I could have implemented infinite precision math as well, but that's a hell of a lot more complicated than implementing mod space, Galios field and discrete elliptic curve classes. As is, for the same work nowadays I'd probably teach myself Ruby, which gives me both seamless infinite precision and operator overloading in one language.
Mod parent Funny, Insightful and/or Informative. Having used Gimp and Paint.NET a bit (and having heard my photographer girlfriend gripe endlessly on GIMP), I think all three mods would be appropriate.
Depends on the definition of "mass produce". Remember, the original assembly lines were just people doing the same specific task over and over, then passing the completed piece to the next person to do the next step, over and over. It might not be possible to automate, but mass production is possible, just not worth it unless everyone and their mother wins the lottery and starts playing RPGs overnight.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's hope they're using a really small font size. Cause those holes are really distracting in the Wikipedia example. The main advantage to reading from paper is faster reading speed (and arguably, less eyestrain), but if you're constantly distracted by the weird font, you'll lose that. Of course, using a small font size in the first place would save more ink (and more paper, due to more words per page) than a gimmicky font.
You're defining communism, not socialism. Some level of redistribution exists in socialist societies, but lasted I checked, Richard Branson is still a billionaire. I'd ask the British. Or the Scandinavians. Maybe they can explain the difference between socialism and communism to you.
Personally, I would have let the auto guys fail, but hey, there is something to be said for maintaining some native manufacturing capability. Helped a lot in World War II. Several of the banks he salvaged are already paying back the money and being "denationalized", and in most cases, while the government had an ownership stake, it exercised no actual control over the banks. The taxes Obama has talked about raising are on those at a relatively high income; there is no clear evidence one way or the other for the effect of high marginal tax rates at the top of the spectrum, and anecdotal historical evidence shows that many of our periods of strongest economic growth coincided with local maxima in the tax rates. Not to be snide, but I've seen how little you need to get a degree in Economics, so forgive me if I ignore your appeal to expertise.
As for your final paragraph, that's one big [citation needed] right there. Most of those look like extremely loose paraphrases. On his behavior in his youth, I'm not inclined to give him too much crap; I went to college, and while I personally did virtually nothing that I'd be embarrassed to read about on the front page, I also saw enough to know that holding that against someone 20 years down the line is petty. BTW, "one Democrat" saying anything isn't all that persuasive unless they actually have a substantial amount of power. The Dems have nuts too, doesn't mean anyone listens to them.
Frankly, you clearly have no understanding of the bill. The only legitimate complaint you have is that it does cost some people some money they might not have wanted to spend, but given that some of those same people would have ended up in an ER and paid the bill with taxpayer and insured people's money instead of their own, I'm not inclined to be sympathetic to free riders.
Which policies? The one where Obama sent soldiers to shut down Fox News? Or the one where Obama pushed through an amendment abolishing term limits? Perhaps the one where Obama nationalized the telephone, cement, electric, steel and oil industries? Enacted price controls on basic food stuffs, thereby leading to nationwide shortages? Wait, you're saying he did none of those things? Never even tried to do anything like them? Hmm... Clearly you know what you're talking about, so I'm sure I'm just missing the obviousness of your claim. Last I heard, he shepherded through an incredibly moderate set of health care reforms that Republicans had previously endorsed at various points reaching back thirty years. Continued the economic policies of his Republican predecessor to try and salvage an economy teetering on the brink. Proposed a few financial reforms that would increase marketplace transparency, allowing the free flow of information to *improve* the efficiency and safety of the market. But nevertheless, he must be a commie.
"Roughly" four in ten in favor of the legislation just passed. And six in ten in favor of the government involving itself in health care. Of course, the most useful statistics are buried near the end: "Three-fourths of respondents say the issue is so complex that it’s hard for the average American to understand the proposals that were debated. [...] Only 20 percent of those surveyed say the system is fine the way it is."
So 20% don't like it the way it is. 60% want the government to involve itself, and while only 40% approve (the article doesn't make clear how the disapprove/undecided split broke down), 75% admit they don't have a clue what was actually passed. Sure sounds like a stunning rejection of the bill. Oh wait, they don't know what they're rejecting, so the poll tells you jack shit.
He succeeded the next time around. Read the article.
How did I start with +2, get (apparently) a +1 each for those three categories, and then drop to +3? I note that there is 30% left over, which might be a downmod that would cancel the Informative, but even then it should be +4. Can the mod system only show 3 moderations? Or is the system screwing with me? It doesn't matter much (I've got excellent and I'm in no danger of losing it), but I'm genuinely curious.
Technically, Britain is pretty darn socialist. And Chile turned totalitarian because the legitimately elected socialist government was overthrown by the military. Communism is impractical, yes, but socialism is fine in moderation. Don't conflate the two.
I've got no beef with socialism in general, but what Chavez is doing isn't socialism. I'm perpetually annoyed by socialism supporters like Sean Penn who defend Chavez, claiming he is not a dictator. I'm sorry, but taking over the media, rewriting the constitution to remove term limits so he can stay in power indefinitely and possibly attempting to assassinate the democratically elected president of a neighboring country (see the first link) are not the actions of a democratic leader. Combined with the allegations of vote fraud and voter suppression in opposition neighborhoods, the man has crossed that line that divides "pompous but legitimate ruler" from "dictator in all but name."
Just a note: TFA actually uses the correct word. Is it so hard for submitters to actually copy and paste the correct words when they are directly quoting in the first place?
Sure that wasn't "conducive"? I know Dell is an electronics manufacturer, but the company itself is likely non-conductive in the first place.
How do you request a disc? I can't find anything on their site.
If you're on a 40"(give or take, 40" is for me, for others it might be 32" or 46") or smaller set, what's the difference?
I should point out that at least one educational theory agrees with this guy. A relative of mine once worked for one of the Waldorf Schools. While their high school education is mostly mainstream, their elementary school education is very different. Virtually no formal math or science training until age 8 or so, and they introduce reading a bit late as well. From my understanding (admittedly limited), they have a quasi-religious belief that children's souls aren't attached at birth, and only begin attaching around age 7 or so. Until then, you're better off training the body, not the mind, so they do a lot of work with arts and crafts instead of traditional core educational material. And no, the whole "soulless" thing doesn't mean they consider them evil or anything, they just believe that all people develop in this way.
I consider their beliefs nutty, but their graduates seem to do quite well. Maybe the nutty belief accidentally corresponds with the natural progression of a child's brain development?
They're still syntactic sugar. If you release a library with a publicly visible variable, then later decide to replace it with a property accessor, code that uses it still needs to be recompiled to byte code against the new library. If they don't, they'll try to access the now non-existent variable.
Don't get me wrong: If you control all software which uses this code, it makes it much easier to replace a variable with property because you don't need to change any other source code, but you still need to recompile everything that uses it, because that syntactic sugar is concealing the fact that the property compiles down a method call byte code, while the variable was being directly accessed.
Java apps usually use some OS specific stuff as well. Virtually every mainstream Java program uses an OS specific installer for instance. And if you're distributing a different installer for every platform, you may as well compile it for every platform.
As for C based desktop apps with cross-platform capabilities, might I point you in the direction of a little thing called Firefox? Yeah, it needs certain libraries coded differently for different platforms, but as noted, so does Java.
Technically, it probably didn't give him the password, just allow him to reset it. Using the lock analogy, it's like a locksmith agreeing to make new locks and keys for anyone who greets them by opening the door of the house; they don't check the ownership records and ID, they just assume that someone who was able to get into the house and hasn't been challenged has the right to change the locks.
Mod parent informative. There is a big difference between "My support of .NET was a mistake" and "Microsoft has limited a promising technology with vague patent threats".
Why is missing properties a bad thing? Properties are just syntactic sugar over getters and setters. They can do work under the hood, same as a getter or setter; very different from just making a variable public. It's just a readability difference; particularly when combining getters and setters on a single line, it's a lot easier to read:
foo.fraction = bar.num / bar.den;
than it is to read:
foo.setFraction(bar.getNum() / bar.getDen());
Contrived example, but an idiom that allows all assignment to be done via the equals operator makes for much more readable code. In Java, you can only do the more readable version by exposing the variables directly; in C#, you get all the implementation hiding of getters and setters with all the ease of use of a variable.
The C++ template mechanism alone is turing-complete.
I'm not entirely sure that's a good thing.
On the other hand, if he's reached the point where an upgrade to a VM language is necessary, C# supports more of the C++ style idioms than Java does, and would be a less drastic change. So it works both ways.
Personally, I wish C# shipped with classes matching Java's BigInteger (and similar) classes, if only because it would have made my college Crypto work that much easier. I implemented some number theory classes myself with operator overloading, but they were only toys, since they maxed out at 64-bit unsigned math. Yeah, I could have implemented infinite precision math as well, but that's a hell of a lot more complicated than implementing mod space, Galios field and discrete elliptic curve classes. As is, for the same work nowadays I'd probably teach myself Ruby, which gives me both seamless infinite precision and operator overloading in one language.
Mod parent Funny, Insightful and/or Informative. Having used Gimp and Paint.NET a bit (and having heard my photographer girlfriend gripe endlessly on GIMP), I think all three mods would be appropriate.
How many java programs that you know of are not cross platform when written correctly?
(emphasis added)
The same could be said of C/C++ programs with appropriate cross-platform macros and libraries.
Depends on the definition of "mass produce". Remember, the original assembly lines were just people doing the same specific task over and over, then passing the completed piece to the next person to do the next step, over and over. It might not be possible to automate, but mass production is possible, just not worth it unless everyone and their mother wins the lottery and starts playing RPGs overnight.