Even simple keywords often don't have direct translations. Even between Western European languages, it can get pretty hairy. Both "por" and "para" in Spanish translate into "for" in English; if you tried translating an English "for" loop into Spanish, you'd probably use "por," but imagine the hell you'd go through if you tried doing it the other way around.
Notably, your French translation of "else" uses an apostrophe. So would the programmer have to escape the apostrophe, or would only double-quoted strings be valid? Would you crunch "tandis que" into "tandisque"? How is this any better than just using the English convention?
If you do have to change the rules, then if someone from another country sees the code you've written, do they have to learn all the new keywords and rules for your localization in order to have the faintest idea what you're doing?
And why bother unless the libraries you're using are also localized? And why would you want two names (say, C++'s "list" and a hypothetical French C++ "liste") for the same thing?
Besides which, it's not to much to ask someone to learn a few keywords in a particular language.
They're working on that. There's an algorithm in development that will use a telepathic interface to generate a list of probable results based on brain-scan heuristics. That way, you don't need to know what you want to watch; Hulu already knows.
Oh, I read you. My point was that I agree with you.
Re:Sorry, but I have to consider the source
on
UN Attacks Free Speech
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Shit, I'm an American, you've hit my limit for justifying crazy-ass Canadian laws.
Re:Sorry, but I have to consider the source
on
UN Attacks Free Speech
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Yes, there's a difference.
The Canadian law is not about "hatred" per se, in that it's not really about feelings. It's about deliberately inciting others to take directly discriminatory actions toward a particular class of people. That would include a broad range of statements such as, "Don't hire Catholics!" or "Kill all Muslims!"
Criticism is rather different, in that one can, for instance, easily say, "Sharia law is sexist" without deliberately inciting any kind of anti-Muslim action. Et cetera.
And the angel of the lord came unto me, snatching me up from my place of slumber. And took me on high, and higher still until we moved to the spaces betwixt the air itself. And he brought me into a vast farmlands of our own midwest. And as we descended, cries of impending doom rose from the soil. One thousand, nay a million voices full of fear. And terror possesed me then. And I begged, "Angel of the Lord, what are these tortured screams?" And the angel said unto me, "These are the cries of the carrots, the cries of the carrots! You see, Reverend Maynard, tomorrow is harvest day and to them it is the Holocaust." And I sprang from my slumber drenched in sweat, like the tears of one million terrified brothers, and roared, "Hear me now, I have seen the light! They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers!" Can I get an amen? Can I get a hallelujah? Thank you Jesus.
I would agree with you, but there's already a lot of precedent for this.
For instance, churches are already tax exempt. (Apparent First Amendment violation number one.) But they are legally prohibited from making political endorsements, or risk losing their tax exempt status. (Apparent First Amendment violation number two.) As with all nonprofits organizations.
A lot would have to change for this to be considered unconstitutional.
That also makes sense. I don't know what licenses cost or how much revenue can be made from ad sales in Country X. All the same, the point is that they simply can't make enough money doing it. And I'm curious about other posters shouting "BITTORRENT" at them, as if they didn't realize they were going to drive consumers off their website.
The big thing is international licensing. Pandora doesn't limit its services because it's xenophobic or because it thinks foreigners shouldn't be able to listen to online music---they do it because the copyright holders are nutty about controlling the markets abroad. I recall reading somewhere that the licensing costs generally don't justify the expenses for international audiences. (Something like this.) So you can either block access to international traffic, or you can try to make it profitable. Last.fm probably isn't losing much (relatively speaking) by losing its international audience, but apparently they still want to keep their service available overseas.
So, to the posters above, please stop complaining about discrimination. This policy is most likely just the trickle-down piss from the record companies.
Back in the day, it was obvious that your dishwasher, microwave, stove, oven, refrigerator, and sink would all be rolled up into a Dishsinkcookerator. All your cleaning needs would be serviced by your handy-dandy Vacuumopduster. And every so often, some new clueless geek tries to hack together a bicycle, a truck, and an airplane to invent the transportation of the future.
I'm sure you can find most of this stuff being advertised on infomercials for $19.95 plus shipping and handling. A $60 value. But wait, there's more!
Maybe some people really do like Swiss Army knives and sporks. But those of us who don't, don't really have to worry---people who are serious about using corkscrews, screwdrivers, and dining utensils will always be able to find the real deal.
Seconded. Even RTFA for references to the April name-change.
The website mentioned, Syfy.com, is actually in use. On the one hand, they've obviously got a professional graphic designer. On the other hand, they're not plugging any Sci-Fi Channel shows! I'd say they put too much effort into it for it to be a straight-up April Fool's prank, but not enough for it to be final. Methinks they're announcing it to see what the reaction will be like---and judging from the fact that it's probably the stupidest idea in the history of stupid ideas, they probably won't go through with it.
Slashdot Mirror
You bastards ought to learn to spell color correctly.
If you're going to try to correct someone's spelling, make sure to proofread your post before you do it. ;-)
Even simple keywords often don't have direct translations. Even between Western European languages, it can get pretty hairy. Both "por" and "para" in Spanish translate into "for" in English; if you tried translating an English "for" loop into Spanish, you'd probably use "por," but imagine the hell you'd go through if you tried doing it the other way around.
Notably, your French translation of "else" uses an apostrophe. So would the programmer have to escape the apostrophe, or would only double-quoted strings be valid? Would you crunch "tandis que" into "tandisque"? How is this any better than just using the English convention?
If you do have to change the rules, then if someone from another country sees the code you've written, do they have to learn all the new keywords and rules for your localization in order to have the faintest idea what you're doing?
And why bother unless the libraries you're using are also localized? And why would you want two names (say, C++'s "list" and a hypothetical French C++ "liste") for the same thing?
Besides which, it's not to much to ask someone to learn a few keywords in a particular language.
Ugh, I realized I did it wrong, too.
(define (filter li criterion)
(if (null? li)
()
(if (criterion (car li))
(cons (car li) (filter (cdr li) criterion))
(filter (cdr li) criterion))))
(define (improved-google-search search-str)
(filter (google-search search-str) is-porn?))
Not even that funny, but I'll be damned if I don't fix it.
There is only one sentence with the words "Slashdot", "journalistic", and "integrity" in it that makes sense
Crap, I thought it was, "Slashdot structure saved from invasive integrity-intensive jumping by journalistic jaguars."
They're working on that. There's an algorithm in development that will use a telepathic interface to generate a list of probable results based on brain-scan heuristics. That way, you don't need to know what you want to watch; Hulu already knows.
(define (improved-google-search str)
(define (filter li criterion)
(if (null? li)
()
(if (criterion (car li))
(cons (car li) (filter (cdr li))
(filter (cdr li)))))
(filter (google-search str) is-porn))
Please forgive me, my Lisp sucks.
You wouldn't happen to have seen my car keys by any chance, would you?
Oh, I read you. My point was that I agree with you.
Shit, I'm an American, you've hit my limit for justifying crazy-ass Canadian laws.
Yes, there's a difference.
The Canadian law is not about "hatred" per se, in that it's not really about feelings. It's about deliberately inciting others to take directly discriminatory actions toward a particular class of people. That would include a broad range of statements such as, "Don't hire Catholics!" or "Kill all Muslims!"
Criticism is rather different, in that one can, for instance, easily say, "Sharia law is sexist" without deliberately inciting any kind of anti-Muslim action. Et cetera.
In case they try to compromise the Intersect.
1945-1969.
Mostly from people with German last names.
They ripped off this song:
And the angel of the lord came unto me, snatching me up from my place of slumber. And took me on high, and higher still until we moved to the spaces betwixt the air itself. And he brought me into a vast farmlands of our own midwest. And as we descended, cries of impending doom rose from the soil. One thousand, nay a million voices full of fear. And terror possesed me then. And I begged, "Angel of the Lord, what are these tortured screams?" And the angel said unto me, "These are the cries of the carrots, the cries of the carrots! You see, Reverend Maynard, tomorrow is harvest day and to them it is the Holocaust." And I sprang from my slumber drenched in sweat, like the tears of one million terrified brothers, and roared, "Hear me now, I have seen the light! They have a consciousness, they have a life, they have a soul! Damn you! Let the rabbits wear glasses! Save our brothers!" Can I get an amen? Can I get a hallelujah? Thank you Jesus.
Congratulations, you missed the point entirely.http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1178347&cid=27358787#
That's nothing. This is the most disgusting shit you'll ever see on the Internet.
[[citation needed]]
I would agree with you, but there's already a lot of precedent for this.
For instance, churches are already tax exempt. (Apparent First Amendment violation number one.) But they are legally prohibited from making political endorsements, or risk losing their tax exempt status. (Apparent First Amendment violation number two.) As with all nonprofits organizations.
A lot would have to change for this to be considered unconstitutional.
Or, knowing those guys, horribly right.
That also makes sense. I don't know what licenses cost or how much revenue can be made from ad sales in Country X. All the same, the point is that they simply can't make enough money doing it. And I'm curious about other posters shouting "BITTORRENT" at them, as if they didn't realize they were going to drive consumers off their website.
The big thing is international licensing. Pandora doesn't limit its services because it's xenophobic or because it thinks foreigners shouldn't be able to listen to online music---they do it because the copyright holders are nutty about controlling the markets abroad. I recall reading somewhere that the licensing costs generally don't justify the expenses for international audiences. (Something like this.) So you can either block access to international traffic, or you can try to make it profitable. Last.fm probably isn't losing much (relatively speaking) by losing its international audience, but apparently they still want to keep their service available overseas.
So, to the posters above, please stop complaining about discrimination. This policy is most likely just the trickle-down piss from the record companies.
I am sure this is of personal interest to many Slashdotters.
Back in the day, it was obvious that your dishwasher, microwave, stove, oven, refrigerator, and sink would all be rolled up into a Dishsinkcookerator. All your cleaning needs would be serviced by your handy-dandy Vacuumopduster. And every so often, some new clueless geek tries to hack together a bicycle, a truck, and an airplane to invent the transportation of the future.
I'm sure you can find most of this stuff being advertised on infomercials for $19.95 plus shipping and handling. A $60 value. But wait, there's more!
Maybe some people really do like Swiss Army knives and sporks. But those of us who don't, don't really have to worry---people who are serious about using corkscrews, screwdrivers, and dining utensils will always be able to find the real deal.
Seconded. Even RTFA for references to the April name-change.
The website mentioned, Syfy.com, is actually in use. On the one hand, they've obviously got a professional graphic designer. On the other hand, they're not plugging any Sci-Fi Channel shows! I'd say they put too much effort into it for it to be a straight-up April Fool's prank, but not enough for it to be final. Methinks they're announcing it to see what the reaction will be like---and judging from the fact that it's probably the stupidest idea in the history of stupid ideas, they probably won't go through with it.
It would be great, but guess who buys the lobbyists? Nobody is above the law, but some people make sure the law doesn't apply to them.
Why don't you try it out and see for yourself? ;-)