Sometime before they bought Trolltech specifically for the purpose of having a bunch of UI experts in-house to improve their cell phone UI's. These things don't happen overnight.
Can anyone show me where in the U.S. Constitution it says the government can force you to buy health insurance? On this basis alone this bill should never have come to fruition. We have this thing call enumerated powers in our Constitution and nowhere does it say the government can compel anyone to buy health insurance just because they are alive.
Huzzah! If the government taxes me and provides a service, I'm okay with that. (Single Payer.)
If the government says I must buy some service from a private company, then I am living in Gilliam's Brazil, and people should be shot.
The insurance companies have no right to exist, and no right to my money. People say that increasing pool size will bring down costs, but the insurance companies will just pocket the savings. There is no reason to believe that they would reduce cost to consumers because you remove the key defining force of the market. Business must entice buyers to the market with valuable goods and services. Once you make purchasing mandatory, businesses no longer have to compete with the competetive market force of 'Fuck You.'
So are deaf people going to sue Sony for not signing bands that cater to the hearing impaired?
Actually, I heard there is a lawyer trying to get deaf people to join a class action suit. Apparently, they don't care about the suit, because no matter how many times he calls, most of them won't even talk to him over the phone.
I mean, before America showed up it was a happy place. They had flowing meadows, and rainbow skies, and rivers made of chocolate where the children danced and laughed and played with gumdrop smiles.
Yeah, when the Americans showed up, they were all like, "Hey lady, eat the apple off that tree of knowledge." The region went to shit after that.
This isn't just "they used the wrong screws", this is "total fake that couldn't possibly work". Saying it was a working board was a total lie.
Meh, they didn't say that was a working board. They said the demo ran off a working board. No real value in playing show and tell with the real engineering samples, as they probably look less like a real card at this point than the mockup does.
You really think that secretaries and accountants and HR reps, who are being forced to sit through a "don't put stupid shit on Facebook because it reflects badly on us" or "don't Twitter about company business or you'll get fired" presentation would understand or care about brute force ssh attacks?
Of course they don't care. That's the point of making a presentation. Do it well, and you can make them interested enough to not be belligerent to policy. They can't know about the strangers in the ethers always attacking unless you show them.
I do agree with the author, sometimes a first-person perspective may not be the only way to immerse a gamer. Video games, especially first person shooters, used to rely solely on vision. The original Wolfenstein 3D on the PC did not have a rumble feature or 5.1 surround sound, but was still considered groundbreaking because of the perspective it put the gamer in.
I disagree strongly with the idea that Wolf3D relied only on visuals to promote a sense of immersion.
"Mein Leben!"
Or maybe it was, "Meine Liebe." I never could quite tell. But, the audio was a significant factor in making Wolf3D interesting. The visuals get more credit, and they were certainly very significant at the time. But, hearing the German soldiers call out in real human voices was something that made the visuals seem like they were showing you a real world. The music also set the mood and helped you get into it.
Playing Wolf3D without SoundBlaster and Adlib support was just disappointing.
If population density is not a factor, how come the fastest U.S. states are those with the densest populations (the Northeast I-95 corridor) while the states with the slowest speeds are those with the sparsest populations (Wyoming, Montana, Utah).
If population density is such an important factor, why doesn't New York City have better Internet than Sweden?
It's obviously a factor, but it isn't hard to realise that good Internet connectivity in the USA faces far more obstacles than just density. And yes, politics has proven to be a very major factor.
If you're downloading music at work, it probably is stealing......of company time. And given that my taxes are paying these people's salaries (that is, you and I are "the company"), I'd really rather them not. Granted, I do wish that they would convey correct information, and I don't expect government workers to go zombie-like through the day without taking a break now and then, but still, I am glad that rampant goofing off in this particular manner is discouraged.
What if you are a government employee who makes powerpoint presentations and you want to include a snippet of a public domain recording? Then you would be legally downloading music as part of your job. Hard to call that "STEALING!"
This statement is incorrect. Subversion requres you to update your working copy before committing whenever you have modified a file that has changed in the repository.
Yes and no. It is possible to only update/checkin at a certain level in the directory hierarchy, and miss a change to a header outside of the scope you are interested in. You have to be slightly beligerent to get into such a situation, but it can happen.
Git and Mercurial are more popular than Subversion? That's the big news to me, with all snarkyness aside. I best be getting out of my bubble.
No shit. Most of my conversations about revision control systems involve whether or not there is any real reason to move from CVS to Subversion. I've used SVN at each of the last few places I've worked, and in my private life, everybody seems to use SVN.
Git seems to bewilder most people I know. I think part of it may be that most of the repositories I deal with are general purpose, and contain some code. If I were dealing with "real" single-project development repositories, I suppose my experiences might be different. But, my personal SVN repository contains more non-code than actual software by a very wide margin. For many things, a centralized model with a definite "this is the most current version of this file" is more useful than everybody having their own version of a file with an intention to merge parts together.
...that irrespective of the situation, press releases are never going to say "this sucks" or "this is completely unoriginal". A few of these are genuine oversights/lack of forward thinking (e.g. the iPhone app one) but the majority of them are standard marketing hyperbole that appears everywhere ("This cleaning product will TRANSFORM YOUR LIFE!").
Even the iPhone press release is always something I've thought of as "Shit, the SDK is nowhere near ready. People love to install 3rd party apps on their Palms and whatnot. We need to convince people this is a non-issue until we are ready to deal with it, otherwise people won't buy the iPhone and we'll never be able to roll at the app store that we've been talking about."
GGP does have a point though. An 8 year old computer is still mostly capable of modern computing needs: surfing the internet, sending email, word processing, etc. On the other hand, a computer from 1991 was not quite as useful in 1999. That would be a 486 in the world of Pentium IIIs (well, IIIs were getting common by then anyway).
For a slightly more extreme comparison, imagine a ten year old computer today, and in 1995. A ten year old computer would be, like you say, a PIII. 1 GHz for a round number. Not super speedy by modern standards, but stuff it full of RAM and you can do most office type things with it, even using fairly current software. The first machine I used to cut DV footage on was even slower than our 10 year old beast.
But, in 1995, a ten your old computer would basically have been a relic. A 640 k machine with a CGA card being compared to Pentiums running Windows 95. A 128k Mac up against a PowerMac. No real comparison at that point.
There are a couple of reasons why progress seemed so rapid at that point. A lot of technology already existed, and was well understood from high end machines by the 1990's. It just hadn't made it into common PC hardware. OF the things that PC companies did invent, everything was still so new that there was still a lot of low-hanging fruit. Also, transistor budgets were still low enough that it was possible to really exploit new fab process improvements because you could use a modestly sized design team. The market was also expanding very rapidly, so the amount of money that could be used for R+D was exploding in that period. The starting points were so primitive that every little improvement seemed to be huge.
Also, the lack of monoculture prior to about the mid-90's meant that you could try completely new shit. Some of it failed, but somebody always had some crazy idea to push things forward. Then, everybody got email and just needed to be able to open their MS Word attachments. Coming up with a revolutionary non-file-centric storage system is worthless if it can't store an MS Word file. Coming up with a new networking paradigm is useless if it means you can't get your email.
Betting on sports is a stupid move. Any form of gambling, be it lottery tickets, horse racing, cock fighting and the Stock Market--they are all equally foolish. Each of these forms of gambling exist to funnel money to the house. Anyone who is foolish enough to buy stocks, bet on football games, buy lottery tickets or step foot in a casino is a stupid fool who deserves to walk away penniless. What kind of foolish idiot walks into a casino in Las Vegas expecting to make money? I guess it's the same sort of dunderhead that forks over money on sports betting or who stands in line at a Quickie-Mart buying $10 worth of lottery tickets. Idiots all. The only part of this statement that is really controversial is including the Stock Market. Well, if you put your money in the stock market in the last 9 years, you would have done better keeping it in cash under your mattress.
If I spend 20 bucks to see Star Conflict Robot Murderers IX at a movie theater, and get the overpriced popcorn and a giant 174 oz soda, I'm making a rational value judgment to spend money on entertainment because I feel I get adequate value of entertaining.
If I spend 20 bucks over the course of two hours at a casino, I'm stupid fool.
A stupid fool who probably talked to a stripper instead of a dork dressed up like Colonel Robokillbot showing off his "real lights and sounds" robo laser chainsaw that he ordered online for $499.
Personally, I don't actually gamble. And, I'd expect not to have much in common with the hypothetical stripper if I did wind up talking to her for some implausible reason. But, if somebody makes a different value judgment than I do with their money, that doesn't automatically make them wrong. It doesn't automatically make them a foolish idiot. Most people spend money on things that are demonstrably of no real value. Gambling has the odd quirk of demonstrably having potential value. That value is rare enough that gambling is clearly a net cost on average, despite the occasional zillion dollar win.
At least with poker, and to a lesser extent, stocks and sports bets, there is a genuine skill element involved which means that you can potentially learn the game well enough to turn a profit. It's just the random chance games where you are guaranteed to lose in the long term.
Perhaps this only indicates that Java and C# are used more by professionals and Python and Ruby are used more by amateurs. No matter where they work (whether or not they're using Java or C# or even programming at work), it merely indicates that people who use Python and Ruby are active during the weekend.
Perhaps this simply means that Python and Ruby are more popular with amateur F/OSS and web developers, something that is so obvious it doesn't even necessitate an article.
While I have personally had plenty of fun with Python, I agree that the conclusion is clearly a bit flawed. Alternate explanations: Professional Java developers less prepared for their job than professional Python developers because they ask more questions at work. People who party all weekend are more likely to have questions about Java. Better, more dedicated devlopers more likely to have an interest in Python. Developers tend to work a day job building things where Java is a good fit, and do extra gigs on the side where Python is a better technical fit to the problem. Developers already know the language they work in. Professional Python developers are curious about moving Java, and ask lots of Java questions from work because Java seems so much more fun than their job. Professional Java developers are less interested in Python, and only inquire about it on weekends when they have spare time to ask about boring languages.
I'm sure one could draw any number of other conclusions that meet Fox standards for reporting.
Standards exist for a reason. If vendors behaves in a non-uniform manner then it makes the development of protocols and software much more challenging. More importantly, it stifles the entire industry.
Speaking of standards, the summary should be using example.com for their domain.
I agree fully that "example.com" really ought to be used as the example domain. That's the only thing we should actually be outraged about. In this case, a web browser handling an nxdomain result by automatically doing a search doesn't hurt anything. Doing it at the dns level hurts everything. In one case, I either use a different tool or reconfigure my existing one. In the other case, all sorts of services can potentially break.
When I searched "1234" on google and bing, the top results are about that Feist song. Thank goodness it doesn't mention anything about it being my root admin password and my luggage combination--hey! Where did my bag go? It was just here, and why is there a sudden spike in my internet tra#%^W&*s%!$AF{:
It kinda makes me wonder though if at that point it's really an educational game, or just a fun RTS that's just vaguely historically themed.
Oh, the point ws to make a fun RTS, and include soem history wherever it helped flesh out the fun. That said, for all your very accurate points about how the OP was wrong about Agincourt, he knows it exists, and knows that archers were very significant to the battle. That puts him ahead of most folks I know.
To address one of your specific points:
In effect, what really happened was more of a "the knights lost to combined arms" case than "the knights lost to archers."
And the OP probably understands your point about combined arms from playing RTS games with "Rock Paper Scissors" loops for unit effectiveness. If he only had a background of ordinary High School education, not only would he not know enough about Agincourt to get some of it wrong and get corrected -- he wouldn't be able to understand the corrections, either!:)
Sure, a game can be a bad way to learn some specifics. (If I always lose the mission, I may wind up misunderstanding who actually won the historical battle!) But, for a lot of background theory, something like an RTS can be surprisingly good at inspiring a general interest in a topic that wouldn't have otherwise been studied at all.
Whenever I see a game that goes out of its way to be educational, I generally see a game that winds up being less educational than a fun game which has a lot of information, simply because kids will focus so intently on the fun game. IF you focus on something like that, and just try to consciously avoid confusing misinformation, you can deliver what all those terrible "edutainment" titles have failed to do in the past.
If you leave a long message, put your phone number at the *beginning* of the message so if they need to hear it again, they don't have to play the whole message.
I'm glad I've finally found that there is a second person who understands this. For so long, I've been convinced that I was completely alone!
Slashdot Mirror
Sometime before they bought Trolltech specifically for the purpose of having a bunch of UI experts in-house to improve their cell phone UI's. These things don't happen overnight.
Huzzah! If the government taxes me and provides a service, I'm okay with that. (Single Payer.)
If the government says I must buy some service from a private company, then I am living in Gilliam's Brazil, and people should be shot.
The insurance companies have no right to exist, and no right to my money. People say that increasing pool size will bring down costs, but the insurance companies will just pocket the savings. There is no reason to believe that they would reduce cost to consumers because you remove the key defining force of the market. Business must entice buyers to the market with valuable goods and services. Once you make purchasing mandatory, businesses no longer have to compete with the competetive market force of 'Fuck You.'
Actually, I heard there is a lawyer trying to get deaf people to join a class action suit. Apparently, they don't care about the suit, because no matter how many times he calls, most of them won't even talk to him over the phone.
Yeah, when the Americans showed up, they were all like, "Hey lady, eat the apple off that tree of knowledge." The region went to shit after that.
This isn't just "they used the wrong screws", this is "total fake that couldn't possibly work". Saying it was a working board was a total lie.
Meh, they didn't say that was a working board. They said the demo ran off a working board. No real value in playing show and tell with the real engineering samples, as they probably look less like a real card at this point than the mockup does.
Of course they don't care. That's the point of making a presentation. Do it well, and you can make them interested enough to not be belligerent to policy. They can't know about the strangers in the ethers always attacking unless you show them.
debug.com
And Americans try to be first at everything!
I disagree strongly with the idea that Wolf3D relied only on visuals to promote a sense of immersion.
"Mein Leben!"
Or maybe it was, "Meine Liebe." I never could quite tell. But, the audio was a significant factor in making Wolf3D interesting. The visuals get more credit, and they were certainly very significant at the time. But, hearing the German soldiers call out in real human voices was something that made the visuals seem like they were showing you a real world. The music also set the mood and helped you get into it.
Playing Wolf3D without SoundBlaster and Adlib support was just disappointing.
After the terminal phase, we turn all GUI.
If population density is such an important factor, why doesn't New York City have better Internet than Sweden?
It's obviously a factor, but it isn't hard to realise that good Internet connectivity in the USA faces far more obstacles than just density. And yes, politics has proven to be a very major factor.
What if you are a government employee who makes powerpoint presentations and you want to include a snippet of a public domain recording? Then you would be legally downloading music as part of your job. Hard to call that "STEALING!"
Yes and no. It is possible to only update/checkin at a certain level in the directory hierarchy, and miss a change to a header outside of the scope you are interested in. You have to be slightly beligerent to get into such a situation, but it can happen.
No shit. Most of my conversations about revision control systems involve whether or not there is any real reason to move from CVS to Subversion. I've used SVN at each of the last few places I've worked, and in my private life, everybody seems to use SVN.
Git seems to bewilder most people I know. I think part of it may be that most of the repositories I deal with are general purpose, and contain some code. If I were dealing with "real" single-project development repositories, I suppose my experiences might be different. But, my personal SVN repository contains more non-code than actual software by a very wide margin. For many things, a centralized model with a definite "this is the most current version of this file" is more useful than everybody having their own version of a file with an intention to merge parts together.
In South Korea, people launch rockets into space.
In Russia, rockets launch people into space.
But, I'm sure South Korea will eventually also develop man-rated space equipment. It'll just take time while they refine the launching capacity.
Even the iPhone press release is always something I've thought of as "Shit, the SDK is nowhere near ready. People love to install 3rd party apps on their Palms and whatnot. We need to convince people this is a non-issue until we are ready to deal with it, otherwise people won't buy the iPhone and we'll never be able to roll at the app store that we've been talking about."
For a slightly more extreme comparison, imagine a ten year old computer today, and in 1995.
A ten year old computer would be, like you say, a PIII. 1 GHz for a round number. Not super speedy by modern standards, but stuff it full of RAM and you can do most office type things with it, even using fairly current software. The first machine I used to cut DV footage on was even slower than our 10 year old beast.
But, in 1995, a ten your old computer would basically have been a relic. A 640 k machine with a CGA card being compared to Pentiums running Windows 95. A 128k Mac up against a PowerMac. No real comparison at that point.
There are a couple of reasons why progress seemed so rapid at that point. A lot of technology already existed, and was well understood from high end machines by the 1990's. It just hadn't made it into common PC hardware. OF the things that PC companies did invent, everything was still so new that there was still a lot of low-hanging fruit. Also, transistor budgets were still low enough that it was possible to really exploit new fab process improvements because you could use a modestly sized design team. The market was also expanding very rapidly, so the amount of money that could be used for R+D was exploding in that period. The starting points were so primitive that every little improvement seemed to be huge.
Also, the lack of monoculture prior to about the mid-90's meant that you could try completely new shit. Some of it failed, but somebody always had some crazy idea to push things forward. Then, everybody got email and just needed to be able to open their MS Word attachments. Coming up with a revolutionary non-file-centric storage system is worthless if it can't store an MS Word file. Coming up with a new networking paradigm is useless if it means you can't get your email.
If I spend 20 bucks to see Star Conflict Robot Murderers IX at a movie theater, and get the overpriced popcorn and a giant 174 oz soda, I'm making a rational value judgment to spend money on entertainment because I feel I get adequate value of entertaining.
If I spend 20 bucks over the course of two hours at a casino, I'm stupid fool.
A stupid fool who probably talked to a stripper instead of a dork dressed up like Colonel Robokillbot showing off his "real lights and sounds" robo laser chainsaw that he ordered online for $499.
Personally, I don't actually gamble. And, I'd expect not to have much in common with the hypothetical stripper if I did wind up talking to her for some implausible reason. But, if somebody makes a different value judgment than I do with their money, that doesn't automatically make them wrong. It doesn't automatically make them a foolish idiot. Most people spend money on things that are demonstrably of no real value. Gambling has the odd quirk of demonstrably having potential value. That value is rare enough that gambling is clearly a net cost on average, despite the occasional zillion dollar win.
At least with poker, and to a lesser extent, stocks and sports bets, there is a genuine skill element involved which means that you can potentially learn the game well enough to turn a profit. It's just the random chance games where you are guaranteed to lose in the long term.
While I have personally had plenty of fun with Python, I agree that the conclusion is clearly a bit flawed.
Alternate explanations:
Professional Java developers less prepared for their job than professional Python developers because they ask more questions at work.
People who party all weekend are more likely to have questions about Java. Better, more dedicated devlopers more likely to have an interest in Python.
Developers tend to work a day job building things where Java is a good fit, and do extra gigs on the side where Python is a better technical fit to the problem.
Developers already know the language they work in. Professional Python developers are curious about moving Java, and ask lots of Java questions from work because Java seems so much more fun than their job. Professional Java developers are less interested in Python, and only inquire about it on weekends when they have spare time to ask about boring languages.
I'm sure one could draw any number of other conclusions that meet Fox standards for reporting.
I agree fully that "example.com" really ought to be used as the example domain. That's the only thing we should actually be outraged about. In this case, a web browser handling an nxdomain result by automatically doing a search doesn't hurt anything. Doing it at the dns level hurts everything. In one case, I either use a different tool or reconfigure my existing one. In the other case, all sorts of services can potentially break.
Sir, the joke is said as "CARRIER LOST"
Really, kids today have no respect for tradition.
During the 1960's and 1970's, we sent several men from the Moon to the Earth. Tragically, all were stranded, and none ever returned to the Moon.
Oh, the point ws to make a fun RTS, and include soem history wherever it helped flesh out the fun. That said, for all your very accurate points about how the OP was wrong about Agincourt, he knows it exists, and knows that archers were very significant to the battle. That puts him ahead of most folks I know.
To address one of your specific points:
And the OP probably understands your point about combined arms from playing RTS games with "Rock Paper Scissors" loops for unit effectiveness. If he only had a background of ordinary High School education, not only would he not know enough about Agincourt to get some of it wrong and get corrected -- he wouldn't be able to understand the corrections, either! :)
Sure, a game can be a bad way to learn some specifics. (If I always lose the mission, I may wind up misunderstanding who actually won the historical battle!) But, for a lot of background theory, something like an RTS can be surprisingly good at inspiring a general interest in a topic that wouldn't have otherwise been studied at all.
Whenever I see a game that goes out of its way to be educational, I generally see a game that winds up being less educational than a fun game which has a lot of information, simply because kids will focus so intently on the fun game. IF you focus on something like that, and just try to consciously avoid confusing misinformation, you can deliver what all those terrible "edutainment" titles have failed to do in the past.
I'm glad I've finally found that there is a second person who understands this. For so long, I've been convinced that I was completely alone!
That's the version that will ship with MMX, which I am very excited about!
Seriously, I love when big companies start recycle product names / numbers fifteen years later.