The linked page is painful to read. Do you perhaps have a better link on the topic? I tried searching, but it didn't yield much except for one rather empty SO question.
Python is a strongly typed, but not statically typed language. This is a common misconception that I see in almost every discussion on the merits of python vs more traditional, compiled languages.
Here is a linkie that explains it rather simply, in case you want to research it further.
If you don't know what app/application you want to open, then you have no business opening the start_menu/metro_interface. Finish your work, decide what you need to open, and then proceed. Unless you're one of those people that uses the start_menu/metro_interface to search through your documents AND you are still deciding what document you want to open while you search. Seriously, this is such a contrived and odd scenario. Honestly, it sounds pretty darn desperate Anti-MS criticism. Perhaps you should instead stick to the low hanging fruit like the rest of the anti-MS people on this thread are doing. Good day.
I have no idea what the fuck you are talking about, or what it has to do with the discussion OR my comments. Also, I never once said anything about "the nature of my being", and I think you're quite confused. So much for that deep meditation of yours.
That's the most you're going to get out of me, because you're obviously not willing to respond to me on the things I said. Good day, sir.
Meditation is not sprituality. So if someone responded to you about meditation saying it's "hokey superstitious bullshit" it's probably because you phrased it in the context of spirituality like you did now in your post. And they would with good reason; you fail to define spirituality and then you switch the topic to "meditation", and then complain about how people shoot down your concept of meditation.
Until people like you learn to separate hokey superstitious bullshit like spirituality with probably reasonable concepts such as meditation, people will continue to view you and your justification for meditation as "nu-age" nonsense.
On a side note. Care to state your definition of "spirituality"? Perhaps you're just using the wrong word to describe whatever you think it is.
Only after I take appropriate interest, yes. However, that says nothing of the mental violation that fear of government-reprisal might happen to me if I didn't allow that money to be taken out of my paycheck in the first place. Government is the ultimate bully, tricking you with his well-meaning "social good" routine.
You can only justify socialist concepts if you have given your populace a choice. Were you given a choice? I know I wasn't.
I don't have the power to affect big business at all. None. I do have power to affect government, and have done so in the past -- and I'm just a serf. And you're just Koch's tool, fool.
Lol, go ahead and keep thinking you have power over government. And you call me the fool. Funny statist AC is being funny.
Because big business doesn't have the power of laws to impose their will on you, unlike government. A big business, no matter how big it is, can't kidnap you and put you into jail if you don't want to associate with them. Good luck not associating with government without being kidnapped and put in jail.
However, you could argue that currently the fact that we have a powerful/overreaching government allows big-business to meddle in peoples' lives by getting business-favorable legislation passed.
Nothing is preventing them doing both, we're not discussing that. We're discussing the moral implications of them spending money on useless murdering that could be used for helping the people below the poverty line in your country.
16% of your effing population is living in poverty. linkie
Yes, because WE are the ones that bought that shit in the first place. It defines us because we defined it, by virtue of our choices. If you want to get all "deep" and "zen" about it, I'd suggest taking up a nu-age yoga class so you can leave the rest of us alone. Damn hippies.
For some of us, stuff is not just "stuff". They're memories... that you get reminded of when you see/use that object. They're gifts from someone you no longer have access to, someone that has long since moved on. They're tokens of periods, emotions, events, people. Because not all of us can just keep our memories safely in our minds. They wear out, and eventually disappear, if we don't keep them relatively fresh.
You don't have to be terrified to take actions against terrorists. Just making the judgment that it is prudent to prevent mass slaughter of your fellow citizens is enough. Or maybe you could explain why it is a good idea to let your fellow citizens be killed by the thousands and do nothing?
And to prevent mass slaughter you have to cause mass slaughter via a supposedly preemptive war? Do you even understand the implications and consequences of the things you write about?
You talk about preventing "your fellow citizens be killed by the thousands" by killing your fellow human beings by the millions. Yes, millions. Please look up the iraq war death toll, including the soldiers you sent over there.
People frightened of their government are prone to interfere with government attempts to protect them.
You then obviously do not understand the violent nature of government. The violence which is completely hidden from you simply by virtue of you always obeying all laws. Your willingness to submit to the laws of your government is the sole thing keeping the government from being violent towards you. Let me know what happens when you fail to pay property taxes, and then try to yank the car keys away from the IRS agent that repossesses your vehicle as payment for those taxes. Yeah, guns. Welcome to your tax farm, let me know how you like being a tax-cow.
Sometimes companies want to hire these "minor celebrity" coders that have an online name/following behind them. They're then given the position of "Technology Specialists" and pretty much do very little work outside representing the company at tech conferences, giving lectures, giving presentations about tech A/B/C. Don't look at me, I have no idea why companies do that.
Sorry, but what makes you think the UN or any existing country should have the rights to anything up there, or enforce them the rights for that matter? They already sucked up ALL the friggin land on our planet, leaving no room for anyone to settle/migrate, instead forcing us to be subservient to their supposed social contract and morally corrupt laws. You'd like them to then project this ownership to yet-unclaimed land, that they would then be oh-so-generous to lease to us with a supposedly "regulation/tax free environment"?
Sorry about the mini-rant, and a little off topic. But it is a whole new world up there that is full of opportunities; and to sully it with a dirty thing such as heavy government is such a bad idea. Even you yourself admit that a regulation/tax free environment is a good thing for some reason, yet fail to make the connection with government. Government is the one that sucks productivity with regulations and taxes, for very little, waste-filled gain.
It's not an either or argument, dude. Please learn the definition of false dichotomy first before you fling it around as if you know when it applies. I didn't say that "either they spend money on killing innocents/soldiers or they spend the money to feed the poor. I see you got a lot of practice in this "misdirection argumentation" routine.
Here is my argument rephrased, because you're a pedantic little statist: If your government spends money on unnecessary and/or morally questionable acts while it has poor/starving/dying people, then it is morally corrupt.
The system isn't morally corrupt in any way. And there's absolutely NO QUESTION that politics has gotten less and less corrupt over the decades and centuries, because voters keep voting for less-corrupt officials.
As long as your country spends trillions on unnecessary wars while a significant proportion of your population is in poverty or starving, then it is morally corrupt. You can assign the blame all you want, but as long as you have that, your country is choosing to kill innocents/soldiers instead of using the money to help feed the poor. As much as I hate government going into the charity business, this shit is just plain morally hypocritical.
I don't vote because I know my true opinion is not represented in any way, even if it wasn't a two party system.. I have to pick (A + B) or (C + D)... I am in no way allowed to have (A + C) or (B + D), because that is the way your political system works. You force me to pick which thing I want most, and have to deal with the rest of the crap the candidate wants.
I refuse to participate in such a system, because voting gives my tacit approval of things I do not approve of, and those things are numerous. Working within a morally corrupt system in order to reduce it's corruptness is hypocritical and ineffective, as we've seen.
The only way out is to gravitate to like-minded individuals and form communities with the eventual goal of seceding from these morally corrupt governments. Their true nature will shine when you start taking the territory that they claim belongs to "the people".
You have no competition when you have government, period, regardless of who created it. Because a government is a monopoly. Take away the government, and leave people to their own devices.
You can make a BIG difference in politics, but you can't expect much when your only contribution is just to show up to vote once every 4 years.
The point is that you shouldn't have to do anything but vote in order to contribute. That's the fundamental flaw with democracy in that your singular vote is meaningless because it gets drowned out by all the other votes that get affected by the assholes that go out and "support them with money, promotion to other voters, and/or personally volunteering to help their campaign". Hardly fair, if you ask me.
You just need to follow the logic, and take them to their base elements. One person, one vote is the assumption that most people make about democracy which is fundamentally wrong. The simple act of going out to change other peoples' minds/votes is making your opinion count more. Either way, it devolves to whoever spends the most money and is the loudest to convince others of their vote is the one that has the biggest/most votes to cast in this so-called democracy.
And the odd thing is that people are very hypocritical about it, and will fight you to their last breath on it. Because that is what they are taught at schools. Voting means jack shit in this day and age. Don't stoop to their level by "voting". It is just a token they gave you to appease you long enough for them to steal your money in the name of "social good". Not even direct-democracy can address these issues, because it's the same thing, even if the votes are fairer.
Let's just call democracy for what it really is. Mob rule.
That's one of the fundamental flaws with democracy. Your singular vote will get drowned out by the people that "Go to meetings, get involved". Sad but true.
Oh, so big companies are to blame for that? And not the government and society that allows it? We all know that capitalist agents will do whatever they can do to make profit, and that's fine because competition keeps it from getting bad. It's only when you have a system of government like we do now where meddling is allowed by corporations that it becomes a problem. That's why taking power away from government is a good thing, because it allows less meddling by everyone, and leaves people to their own devices.
Slashdot Mirror
Congrats to them, they've just reinvented web forms from asp.net, which we've had for years if not a decade.
The linked page is painful to read. Do you perhaps have a better link on the topic? I tried searching, but it didn't yield much except for one rather empty SO question.
Python is a strongly typed, but not statically typed language. This is a common misconception that I see in almost every discussion on the merits of python vs more traditional, compiled languages.
Here is a linkie that explains it rather simply, in case you want to research it further.
Btw, javascript is not strongly typed.
Not only that, but they didn't spell the word daughter correctly: "daugther".
If you don't know what app/application you want to open, then you have no business opening the start_menu/metro_interface. Finish your work, decide what you need to open, and then proceed. Unless you're one of those people that uses the start_menu/metro_interface to search through your documents AND you are still deciding what document you want to open while you search. Seriously, this is such a contrived and odd scenario. Honestly, it sounds pretty darn desperate Anti-MS criticism. Perhaps you should instead stick to the low hanging fruit like the rest of the anti-MS people on this thread are doing. Good day.
I have no idea what the fuck you are talking about, or what it has to do with the discussion OR my comments. Also, I never once said anything about "the nature of my being", and I think you're quite confused. So much for that deep meditation of yours.
That's the most you're going to get out of me, because you're obviously not willing to respond to me on the things I said. Good day, sir.
You're essentially asking me to argue with myself? lol, that's a new low...
Meditation is not sprituality. So if someone responded to you about meditation saying it's "hokey superstitious bullshit" it's probably because you phrased it in the context of spirituality like you did now in your post. And they would with good reason; you fail to define spirituality and then you switch the topic to "meditation", and then complain about how people shoot down your concept of meditation.
Until people like you learn to separate hokey superstitious bullshit like spirituality with probably reasonable concepts such as meditation, people will continue to view you and your justification for meditation as "nu-age" nonsense.
On a side note. Care to state your definition of "spirituality"? Perhaps you're just using the wrong word to describe whatever you think it is.
Only after I take appropriate interest, yes. However, that says nothing of the mental violation that fear of government-reprisal might happen to me if I didn't allow that money to be taken out of my paycheck in the first place. Government is the ultimate bully, tricking you with his well-meaning "social good" routine.
You can only justify socialist concepts if you have given your populace a choice. Were you given a choice? I know I wasn't.
I don't have the power to affect big business at all. None. I do have power to affect government, and have done so in the past -- and I'm just a serf. And you're just Koch's tool, fool.
Lol, go ahead and keep thinking you have power over government. And you call me the fool. Funny statist AC is being funny.
Because big business doesn't have the power of laws to impose their will on you, unlike government. A big business, no matter how big it is, can't kidnap you and put you into jail if you don't want to associate with them. Good luck not associating with government without being kidnapped and put in jail.
However, you could argue that currently the fact that we have a powerful/overreaching government allows big-business to meddle in peoples' lives by getting business-favorable legislation passed.
Nothing is preventing them doing both, we're not discussing that. We're discussing the moral implications of them spending money on useless murdering that could be used for helping the people below the poverty line in your country.
16% of your effing population is living in poverty. linkie
Yes, because WE are the ones that bought that shit in the first place. It defines us because we defined it, by virtue of our choices. If you want to get all "deep" and "zen" about it, I'd suggest taking up a nu-age yoga class so you can leave the rest of us alone. Damn hippies.
For some of us, stuff is not just "stuff". They're memories... that you get reminded of when you see/use that object. They're gifts from someone you no longer have access to, someone that has long since moved on. They're tokens of periods, emotions, events, people. Because not all of us can just keep our memories safely in our minds. They wear out, and eventually disappear, if we don't keep them relatively fresh.
You don't have to be terrified to take actions against terrorists. Just making the judgment that it is prudent to prevent mass slaughter of your fellow citizens is enough. Or maybe you could explain why it is a good idea to let your fellow citizens be killed by the thousands and do nothing?
And to prevent mass slaughter you have to cause mass slaughter via a supposedly preemptive war? Do you even understand the implications and consequences of the things you write about?
You talk about preventing "your fellow citizens be killed by the thousands" by killing your fellow human beings by the millions. Yes, millions. Please look up the iraq war death toll, including the soldiers you sent over there.
People frightened of their government are prone to interfere with government attempts to protect them.
You then obviously do not understand the violent nature of government. The violence which is completely hidden from you simply by virtue of you always obeying all laws. Your willingness to submit to the laws of your government is the sole thing keeping the government from being violent towards you. Let me know what happens when you fail to pay property taxes, and then try to yank the car keys away from the IRS agent that repossesses your vehicle as payment for those taxes. Yeah, guns. Welcome to your tax farm, let me know how you like being a tax-cow.
Sometimes companies want to hire these "minor celebrity" coders that have an online name/following behind them. They're then given the position of "Technology Specialists" and pretty much do very little work outside representing the company at tech conferences, giving lectures, giving presentations about tech A/B/C. Don't look at me, I have no idea why companies do that.
Sorry, but what makes you think the UN or any existing country should have the rights to anything up there, or enforce them the rights for that matter? They already sucked up ALL the friggin land on our planet, leaving no room for anyone to settle/migrate, instead forcing us to be subservient to their supposed social contract and morally corrupt laws. You'd like them to then project this ownership to yet-unclaimed land, that they would then be oh-so-generous to lease to us with a supposedly "regulation/tax free environment"?
Sorry about the mini-rant, and a little off topic. But it is a whole new world up there that is full of opportunities; and to sully it with a dirty thing such as heavy government is such a bad idea. Even you yourself admit that a regulation/tax free environment is a good thing for some reason, yet fail to make the connection with government. Government is the one that sucks productivity with regulations and taxes, for very little, waste-filled gain.
It's not an either or argument, dude. Please learn the definition of false dichotomy first before you fling it around as if you know when it applies. I didn't say that "either they spend money on killing innocents/soldiers or they spend the money to feed the poor. I see you got a lot of practice in this "misdirection argumentation" routine.
Here is my argument rephrased, because you're a pedantic little statist: If your government spends money on unnecessary and/or morally questionable acts while it has poor/starving/dying people, then it is morally corrupt.
The system isn't morally corrupt in any way. And there's absolutely NO QUESTION that politics has gotten less and less corrupt over the decades and centuries, because voters keep voting for less-corrupt officials.
As long as your country spends trillions on unnecessary wars while a significant proportion of your population is in poverty or starving, then it is morally corrupt. You can assign the blame all you want, but as long as you have that, your country is choosing to kill innocents/soldiers instead of using the money to help feed the poor. As much as I hate government going into the charity business, this shit is just plain morally hypocritical.
I don't vote because I know my true opinion is not represented in any way, even if it wasn't a two party system.. I have to pick (A + B) or (C + D)... I am in no way allowed to have (A + C) or (B + D), because that is the way your political system works. You force me to pick which thing I want most, and have to deal with the rest of the crap the candidate wants.
I refuse to participate in such a system, because voting gives my tacit approval of things I do not approve of, and those things are numerous. Working within a morally corrupt system in order to reduce it's corruptness is hypocritical and ineffective, as we've seen.
The only way out is to gravitate to like-minded individuals and form communities with the eventual goal of seceding from these morally corrupt governments. Their true nature will shine when you start taking the territory that they claim belongs to "the people".
You have no competition when you have government, period, regardless of who created it. Because a government is a monopoly. Take away the government, and leave people to their own devices.
You can make a BIG difference in politics, but you can't expect much when your only contribution is just to show up to vote once every 4 years.
The point is that you shouldn't have to do anything but vote in order to contribute. That's the fundamental flaw with democracy in that your singular vote is meaningless because it gets drowned out by all the other votes that get affected by the assholes that go out and "support them with money, promotion to other voters, and/or personally volunteering to help their campaign". Hardly fair, if you ask me.
You just need to follow the logic, and take them to their base elements. One person, one vote is the assumption that most people make about democracy which is fundamentally wrong. The simple act of going out to change other peoples' minds/votes is making your opinion count more. Either way, it devolves to whoever spends the most money and is the loudest to convince others of their vote is the one that has the biggest/most votes to cast in this so-called democracy.
And the odd thing is that people are very hypocritical about it, and will fight you to their last breath on it. Because that is what they are taught at schools. Voting means jack shit in this day and age. Don't stoop to their level by "voting". It is just a token they gave you to appease you long enough for them to steal your money in the name of "social good". Not even direct-democracy can address these issues, because it's the same thing, even if the votes are fairer.
Let's just call democracy for what it really is. Mob rule.
That's one of the fundamental flaws with democracy. Your singular vote will get drowned out by the people that "Go to meetings, get involved". Sad but true.
Oh, so big companies are to blame for that? And not the government and society that allows it? We all know that capitalist agents will do whatever they can do to make profit, and that's fine because competition keeps it from getting bad. It's only when you have a system of government like we do now where meddling is allowed by corporations that it becomes a problem. That's why taking power away from government is a good thing, because it allows less meddling by everyone, and leaves people to their own devices.
And your "VOTE" is influenced and manipulated by external parties and their campaigning/marketting. Yes sir, YOUR vote counts oh so much. Not.