Joking aside, you just put the big file on a shared web drive that does not require registration for the recipient (unlike facebook) and you put a link to the file in the email. I imagine it is roughly how you would do the same thing using facebook, so there should be no new technical challenges in store, only googling up a site with the right terms (there are lots, I wouldn't plug any specific ones).
Please note that this may not be a good way to transmit sensitive, work related material, but then of course neither is facebook. For that, ask your admins at work what they like.
Because it is not clear that it is editorializing if no more neutral ways of framing the objective situation are handy. An example of such a neutral phrasing would make your case.
Sure, but that's not the issue. The reason Google is making a fuss now is that Facebook in turn won't freely share your contacts with Crazebook and Acebook, exposing you to their ads and ousted head of state connections as well. As far as I understand, anyway.
The plan was to explicitly not have any opinions on everything else so as to be able to negotiate credibly with the two blocks and then support the agenda of one block in all those things, the block that would agree to the terms in the pirate agenda on privacy. The idea was furthermore that this would allow unhappy voters from both blocks to vote pirate.
"It's not a person following you around but a robot kindly offering me a deal on a fresh hot cup of coffee. It generally isn't in your way but it still pipes up every couple of minutes asking if you'd like that coffee now. Not only that, it takes notes of who you talk to, anything else you buy or even look at."
Where can I buy one of these fantastic secretary robots, complete with coffee making capabilities?
What's the gross misuse of "are"? It refers to "implications" which is plural. Abbreviating to "R" is of course just leet and not a grammar issue. And "these" is not misspelled since it's leet to use a "Z" to represent an "s".
Could you type a few lines of code to show how you mean that you could break things this way in C# ?
I'm with you as far as the type info not being there in the bytecode, but as far as I know that's because it doesn't have to be, since any potential issues would be handled earlier when the compiler would ask you to cast.
For example:
object foo = new WrongClass(); IList[RightClass] list = new List[RightClass]();//using [] for generics since this is posted in a html forum... list.Add( foo );// won't compile, complaining that there's no implicit (down)cast from object to RightClass list.Add( (RightClass) foo);// will compile, but will cause a runtime error when the attempt is made to cast foo to RightClass - NOT when trying to add foo to the list, since that point is never reached...
Using reflection doesn't really change any of this (afaics), since casts are still required.
Right, but what answer do you expect to the question "is Disco really culturally relevant anymore" from alt.fan.disco? That is, you're not crazy for asking, it's asking that question _here_ that makes you crazy.
The risk is certainly there ("Microsoft squishing you") but I think you can weigh that risk into the total tally and still end up with C# without being nuts. It has other advantages, such as still being actively developed (though some might find that another drawback) and that coding C# usually means some decent job opportunities. But I agree one shouldn't go for C# without being clear on the risk you depict.
Slashdot Mirror
email bitch, you obviously don't use it. ;)
Joking aside, you just put the big file on a shared web drive that does not require registration for the recipient (unlike facebook) and you put a link to the file in the email. I imagine it is roughly how you would do the same thing using facebook, so there should be no new technical challenges in store, only googling up a site with the right terms (there are lots, I wouldn't plug any specific ones).
Please note that this may not be a good way to transmit sensitive, work related material, but then of course neither is facebook. For that, ask your admins at work what they like.
Well, it's "naturally-occurring" all right...
Snow-enabler!!
I forget too, but it was before her brother blew up their death star.
Because it is not clear that it is editorializing if no more neutral ways of framing the objective situation are handy. An example of such a neutral phrasing would make your case.
Well, right now the Wikileaks servers are hosted in Sweden, but Assange is wanted, so I guess in a way you got your wish?
"I showed early on that "Michael Zubitskiy" did not exist"
How?
Sure, but that's not the issue. The reason Google is making a fuss now is that Facebook in turn won't freely share your contacts with Crazebook and Acebook, exposing you to their ads and ousted head of state connections as well. As far as I understand, anyway.
Even with the very best balloon design, the very best tethers and the very best launch protocol...
...and the very best gorilla at the payload release handle.
Not to worry, it currently is modded to 0 points!
The plan was to explicitly not have any opinions on everything else so as to be able to negotiate credibly with the two blocks and then support the agenda of one block in all those things, the block that would agree to the terms in the pirate agenda on privacy. The idea was furthermore that this would allow unhappy voters from both blocks to vote pirate.
Really? I thought legislators (politicians) were supposed to create law, and the legal system (judges) were there to interpret the law.
...per day. Otherwise, if you only roll the dice a few times per day, the unlikely will only happen once in a blue moon.
but "conspirators" is plural.
Well, them's the breaks for us early adopters.
"It's not a person following you around but a robot kindly offering me a deal on a fresh hot cup of coffee. It generally isn't in your way but it still pipes up every couple of minutes asking if you'd like that coffee now. Not only that, it takes notes of who you talk to, anything else you buy or even look at."
Where can I buy one of these fantastic secretary robots, complete with coffee making capabilities?
To be fair, so do everyone who send in the data.
What's the gross misuse of "are"? It refers to "implications" which is plural. Abbreviating to "R" is of course just leet and not a grammar issue. And "these" is not misspelled since it's leet to use a "Z" to represent an "s".
What poor grammars?
Well, he did it twice, just to be sure.
"Let's see how long public support in Sweden for the Pirate Party lasts when residents cannot communicate with others outside the country."
Yes, let's make Rick Falkvinge Prime Minister indeed.
To make themselves easily replaceable is "the most fundamental job anyone in a position of any kind of managerial authority in any organization has"?
I don't see that happening a lot in practice.
Could you type a few lines of code to show how you mean that you could break things this way in C# ?
I'm with you as far as the type info not being there in the bytecode, but as far as I know that's because it doesn't have to be, since any potential issues would be handled earlier when the compiler would ask you to cast.
For example:
object foo = new WrongClass(); //using [] for generics since this is posted in a html forum... // won't compile, complaining that there's no implicit (down)cast from object to RightClass // will compile, but will cause a runtime error when the attempt is made to cast foo to RightClass - NOT when trying to add foo to the list, since that point is never reached...
IList[RightClass] list = new List[RightClass]();
list.Add( foo );
list.Add( (RightClass) foo);
Using reflection doesn't really change any of this (afaics), since casts are still required.
Please let me know what I'm missing?
Right, but what answer do you expect to the question "is Disco really culturally relevant anymore" from alt.fan.disco? That is, you're not crazy for asking, it's asking that question _here_ that makes you crazy.
The risk is certainly there ("Microsoft squishing you") but I think you can weigh that risk into the total tally and still end up with C# without being nuts. It has other advantages, such as still being actively developed (though some might find that another drawback) and that coding C# usually means some decent job opportunities. But I agree one shouldn't go for C# without being clear on the risk you depict.