Just fill in the blanks, and you'll realize that it's a silly
question. The article could have just said, "people are abusing CGI, please stop".
Of course, that wouldn't have been as interesting.
If people start shooting long takes just for the sake of it, It'll probably become just as annoying as CGI.
Closures the antidote to temporary objects? Yeah, sure.
I'm not using it, but it has nothing to do with privacy.
It has more to do with not wanting to see half my highschool
class drunk and metamorphosed into overweight soccermoms/cubejocks.
If I wanted to see that, I'd have gone to the 10 and 20 year reunions.
Oh, and Farmville. 'nuff said. FaceBook just has too much of an AOL,
least common denominator feel to it. The privacy issue is just another thing
that doesn't even make it onto the list. Before there can be a privacy
issue with something, you actually have to want to use it.
Am I a butterfly imagining that everybody on Slashdot is a bot
discussing a story about bots, or am I a bot posting about people
or bots on Slashdot imagining that I'm a bot or a butterfly or something?
Just stop breaking things and messing with the classic views.
If you have to cut some staff, fine. Don't get bought. It'll
just get worse and I'll have to change my e-mail. Don't show
obtrusive ads. We're willing to look at ads if they're not obtrusive.
Most of your current ads are blocked by my HOSTS file. Stop being
a dick, and maybe I'll stop blocking your ads. See Google for a reference.
Don't have anything to do with AOL. They're the kiss of death.
Sincerely, somebody who remembers when you were great,
and is really loath to change, but will if you screw it up badly enough.
A good point, even though you were moderated Funny. I should clarify
my PoV. Simply being a Maverick isn't enough. You have to be the right
kind. McCain's willingness to compromise not only on his party's core values,
but on Constitutional values (via campaign finance reform), wasn't, IMHO, the kind
of Maverick attitude this country needed. His running mate's certainly wasn't
either. At least we don't have oil gobs washing up on the coast of Big Sur... yet.
We were hoping for a Theodore Roosevelt. We got a Bush with a brain and a tan.
To flesh that out--I think a TR is exactly what we needed. That's somebody
who isn't afraid to go against the party and prevailing wisdom among the elites.
That would NOT be somebody who wants "card check" to expand union power. It'd
be somebody who is able to use his bully pulpit to push for a restoration of
a progressive tax structure that would truly benefit the working class, and not just
the ones lucky enough to have a cushy union job.
Instead, he pushed card-check which is DOA with Republicans in Congress, and
he will probably be forced to compromise on the Bush tax cuts.
It's pretty ironic that the "populist" tea party movement probably has a lot
of people who would be well served by the kind of Progressive movement that existed
100 years ago. Instead, they're voting for more Corporatism.
It's a story told on the Internet by a person who alleges to have been a prisoner, and
to have been told the story by another prisoner. It must be true!
That said, there are *many* reliable accounts of abuse in the "war on drugs". I'm
just pointing out a humorous aspect of any debate regarding the veracity of this
particular story. And yes, I realize "must be true" is not the same thing as "easy
to believe" and am taking just a bit of license here to get a chuckle.
If the punishment were easy, parties on both sides
wouldn't hesistate to use this tactic on a regular basis.
They'd spend a night in jail, pick up some trash by the side
of the highway, and then return to party HQ with a pat on the back
and a hearty, "congratulations, you took your first pinch like a man".
Thirty months in the pokey helps take that option away, although some
hardcore operatives might still do it. In cases where the organization
routinely funded it, you'd bring in RICO laws of course. It might
be possible to RICO some community org, or even a labor union. Prosecuting
a major party under RICO? Let's not go there.
If it were possible for money to "crush it" in the polls,
we'd be talking about governor Meg Whitman of California now.
Referring again to California, they could not get people
to vote for a parks tax, even by saturating us with ads showing
cute little fox pups poking their heads out of the den.
This election made me feel just a bit better about living here,
knowing that fellow Californians can't be manipulated like that.
In the case of the parks proposition, my rationale for voting NO
went like this: The parks were underfunded by a financial crisis. Crises
pass. New taxation methods are virtually forever. Also, there would
be uninteded consequences. As it stands now, many parks have entry fees.
With the tax, any Californian with a car would have the right (or would feel
justified in demaning the right) to enter without a fee. This would require
more infrastructure to support the demand. Thus, the gain from the tax might
be negated. Then, they'd want to raise it. Closing the parks was a bluff anyway.
The parks provide a return to the state indirectly, by supporting tourist businesses near
the parks, which pay other taxes. I can't speak for the rest of the state; but I bet they realized all
of this too.
The cute little foxes didn't sway us, and neither did Meg's millions.
Large retailers hedge commodity inputs, the most famous
example I can think of is Southwest Airlines successfully hedging
against the $100+/bbl oil we had recently. The price of oil was
never reflected to that degree in their ticket prices.
In general, large retailers hedge, and in a competitive market
they won't raise prices quickly in response to commodity inputs. The
exception to this seems to be retail gasoline, which will rise at
the drop of a hat, and then settle down slowly.
So. Commodity prices have to be high long enough for the hedges
to run out. If the commodities merely spike, there will be no CPI impact.
Mod parent up. Arguably, we're re-living 1900 here in some ways
too; but it's much more apparent in China.
Under the Chinese system, how can there be an Upton Sinclair though?
They'll just squash him.
I don't think things like this can go on forever though. I've said
it a number of times: "If the Chinese aren't careful, they're going
to have a communist revolution on their hands".
Followed by, "how long before China sets a river on fire?".
I remember just after Tienanmen, when it was readily apparent
that the Chinese were going to do what Gorbachev wanted--bring market
economics to the old system without destroying it. As detestable as
dictatorship is, it seemed like an interesting experiment as long as
I didn't have to live under it. They had the chance to retain some of
the things that made China interesting and liveable (such as their use
of the bicycle for daily commuting) while bringing market economics to
bear on other problems.
Alas, the Chinese learned *nothing* from the West in this regard, and
one of the first articles I remember reading about the new China was lamenting
how it was becomeing impossible to cycle to work without hacking up a lung
due to diesel exhaust.
Perhaps realizing that even longtime Windows user like
myself refuse to click the "must install Silverlight" link
on the few websites that have it.
The only place I have this problem is on a few streaming
radio sites. In almost all cases, they have another link
for the "basic player" which gives me what I wanted: audio
from their station without having to install more crap.
The 3 gorges will have nothing on us. That'll show 'em!
And if destroying the natural beauty isn't enough, I'm sure we
can find some priceless pueblo or ancient burial mound, and turn it
into a cooling pond for a giant nuclear plant. Take that, China!
Slashdot Mirror
Just fill in the blanks, and you'll realize that it's a silly question. The article could have just said, "people are abusing CGI, please stop". Of course, that wouldn't have been as interesting.
If people start shooting long takes just for the sake of it, It'll probably become just as annoying as CGI.
Closures the antidote to temporary objects? Yeah, sure.
I'm not using it, but it has nothing to do with privacy. It has more to do with not wanting to see half my highschool class drunk and metamorphosed into overweight soccermoms/cubejocks.
If I wanted to see that, I'd have gone to the 10 and 20 year reunions.
Oh, and Farmville. 'nuff said. FaceBook just has too much of an AOL, least common denominator feel to it. The privacy issue is just another thing that doesn't even make it onto the list. Before there can be a privacy issue with something, you actually have to want to use it.
Am I a butterfly imagining that everybody on Slashdot is a bot discussing a story about bots, or am I a bot posting about people or bots on Slashdot imagining that I'm a bot or a butterfly or something?
The comment is only if you actually have extra code before the fall-through. For example, no comment here:
A case like this does:
The first case, although technicly fall-through, is not what I think of when I think of fall-through, since no extra code is executed.
I've used fall-through on occasion, but I leave a comment:
I consider an accidental fall-through to be far more likely than an intentional one.
Dear Yahoo,
Just stop breaking things and messing with the classic views. If you have to cut some staff, fine. Don't get bought. It'll just get worse and I'll have to change my e-mail. Don't show obtrusive ads. We're willing to look at ads if they're not obtrusive. Most of your current ads are blocked by my HOSTS file. Stop being a dick, and maybe I'll stop blocking your ads. See Google for a reference. Don't have anything to do with AOL. They're the kiss of death.
Sincerely, somebody who remembers when you were great, and is really loath to change, but will if you screw it up badly enough.
I don't think anybody was expecting a silver bullet.
It's interesting. You just reminded me of how my jr. high history teacher described FDR's approach: shotgun.
Now, if you want to stereoptype Americans as obsessed with firearms, I won't argue with you there. :)
Coke Pepsi and Water are not the choices here.
It's more like Coke, Pepsi or a bag of salty nuts.
As soon as you try the salty nuts, you're right back to Coke or Pepsi.
What kind of coffee shops are you attending?
Moderators need to find out what schmaltz is.
A good point, even though you were moderated Funny. I should clarify my PoV. Simply being a Maverick isn't enough. You have to be the right kind. McCain's willingness to compromise not only on his party's core values, but on Constitutional values (via campaign finance reform), wasn't, IMHO, the kind of Maverick attitude this country needed. His running mate's certainly wasn't either. At least we don't have oil gobs washing up on the coast of Big Sur... yet.
We were hoping for a Theodore Roosevelt. We got a Bush with a brain and a tan.
To flesh that out--I think a TR is exactly what we needed. That's somebody who isn't afraid to go against the party and prevailing wisdom among the elites. That would NOT be somebody who wants "card check" to expand union power. It'd be somebody who is able to use his bully pulpit to push for a restoration of a progressive tax structure that would truly benefit the working class, and not just the ones lucky enough to have a cushy union job.
Instead, he pushed card-check which is DOA with Republicans in Congress, and he will probably be forced to compromise on the Bush tax cuts.
It's pretty ironic that the "populist" tea party movement probably has a lot of people who would be well served by the kind of Progressive movement that existed 100 years ago. Instead, they're voting for more Corporatism.
I find this very easy to believe
It's a story told on the Internet by a person who alleges to have been a prisoner, and to have been told the story by another prisoner. It must be true!
That said, there are *many* reliable accounts of abuse in the "war on drugs". I'm just pointing out a humorous aspect of any debate regarding the veracity of this particular story. And yes, I realize "must be true" is not the same thing as "easy to believe" and am taking just a bit of license here to get a chuckle.
If the punishment were easy, parties on both sides wouldn't hesistate to use this tactic on a regular basis. They'd spend a night in jail, pick up some trash by the side of the highway, and then return to party HQ with a pat on the back and a hearty, "congratulations, you took your first pinch like a man". Thirty months in the pokey helps take that option away, although some hardcore operatives might still do it. In cases where the organization routinely funded it, you'd bring in RICO laws of course. It might be possible to RICO some community org, or even a labor union. Prosecuting a major party under RICO? Let's not go there.
If it were possible for money to "crush it" in the polls, we'd be talking about governor Meg Whitman of California now.
Referring again to California, they could not get people to vote for a parks tax, even by saturating us with ads showing cute little fox pups poking their heads out of the den.
This election made me feel just a bit better about living here, knowing that fellow Californians can't be manipulated like that.
In the case of the parks proposition, my rationale for voting NO went like this: The parks were underfunded by a financial crisis. Crises pass. New taxation methods are virtually forever. Also, there would be uninteded consequences. As it stands now, many parks have entry fees. With the tax, any Californian with a car would have the right (or would feel justified in demaning the right) to enter without a fee. This would require more infrastructure to support the demand. Thus, the gain from the tax might be negated. Then, they'd want to raise it. Closing the parks was a bluff anyway. The parks provide a return to the state indirectly, by supporting tourist businesses near the parks, which pay other taxes. I can't speak for the rest of the state; but I bet they realized all of this too.
The cute little foxes didn't sway us, and neither did Meg's millions.
Bob, what are you doing in my house, on my farm, and why did you slaughter and roast that cow?
Bob: It's my house. The map is correct. Give or take 3000 meters.
Yes, but they're so far north they actually have to look south to see it.
Seriously. They seem to be at a higher lat than almost all of Russia. Pretty impressive.
Large retailers hedge commodity inputs, the most famous example I can think of is Southwest Airlines successfully hedging against the $100+/bbl oil we had recently. The price of oil was never reflected to that degree in their ticket prices.
In general, large retailers hedge, and in a competitive market they won't raise prices quickly in response to commodity inputs. The exception to this seems to be retail gasoline, which will rise at the drop of a hat, and then settle down slowly.
So. Commodity prices have to be high long enough for the hedges to run out. If the commodities merely spike, there will be no CPI impact.
Yeah, I can't wait for the money supply to be controlled by international gold traders and/or mining cartels.
We won't have any economic crises after that.
Was it as obvious as the "hot chick" named Tanya486 who follows you, is following 56000 other people, and has 2 followers?
What the world needs is more people who actually do things instead of sniping cheap shots from the sidelines
And, if I may add, "How do you know that software won't form the base for an open standard some day?".
Documents take time and cost money. Free reference implementations are priceless.
Narrator: IN A.D. 2010, WAR WAS BEGINNING.
Captain: What Happen?
Mechanic: Somebody set up us the Cherry BOMB.
Opeartor: WE GET WiFi SIGNAL.
Captain: WHAT !!
Operator: All your lameness filter are belong to us.
You will not type the rest of this parody because you
are too lazy to fix it.
Mark your time.
Operator: Medium-sized SCREEN TURN ON.
Mod parent up. Arguably, we're re-living 1900 here in some ways too; but it's much more apparent in China.
Under the Chinese system, how can there be an Upton Sinclair though? They'll just squash him.
I don't think things like this can go on forever though. I've said it a number of times: "If the Chinese aren't careful, they're going to have a communist revolution on their hands".
Followed by, "how long before China sets a river on fire?".
I remember just after Tienanmen, when it was readily apparent that the Chinese were going to do what Gorbachev wanted--bring market economics to the old system without destroying it. As detestable as dictatorship is, it seemed like an interesting experiment as long as I didn't have to live under it. They had the chance to retain some of the things that made China interesting and liveable (such as their use of the bicycle for daily commuting) while bringing market economics to bear on other problems.
Alas, the Chinese learned *nothing* from the West in this regard, and one of the first articles I remember reading about the new China was lamenting how it was becomeing impossible to cycle to work without hacking up a lung due to diesel exhaust.
Perhaps realizing that even longtime Windows user like myself refuse to click the "must install Silverlight" link on the few websites that have it.
The only place I have this problem is on a few streaming radio sites. In almost all cases, they have another link for the "basic player" which gives me what I wanted: audio from their station without having to install more crap.
The 3 gorges will have nothing on us. That'll show 'em!
And if destroying the natural beauty isn't enough, I'm sure we can find some priceless pueblo or ancient burial mound, and turn it into a cooling pond for a giant nuclear plant. Take that, China!