Or maybe, "it bugs me when dutch/belgians don't"? Also, I'm pretty sure that Dutch, English, Belgian, and Nazi should be capitalized. Not sure about the last one, since you're not talking about the Third Reich. What is more,
...if it's not pointed out, you don't know you've made a mistake, so you keep on making it.
My first CS class (when I transferred from a community college to university) was CS 101, Software Engineering (in Java). We were using Eclipse on Windows, in the lab. Our undergraduate TA offered an optional session wherin he walked us through the experience of logging in to the department's Linux server, then coding, compiling, and running a simple Java program there. I had used Linux on the desktop before, but never for programming, and certainly not over ssh. It was illuminating, and I fell in love. I try to avoid Java lately, but use Linux every day.
Some people here are moaning that if students don't know Linux by the point they take this class, they shouldn't be in Computer Science. But one has to learn somewhere, and I think that learning from a peer (like an undergraduate TA) is an excellent place for initial exposure.
Also, what was up with the mixing of “he” and “she”. I don’t know why, but I found this very distracting.
The reason for the combination was almost assuredly an attempt to avoid sexist language. I agree that is was tremendously distracting. Using 'he' all the time is sexist (using only 'she' could be construed even worse, I suppose, since we're talking about jerks); using '(s)he', 'she/he', 'xe', etc. is bizzarre and awkward; and using truly neutral pronouns like 'they' is frowned upon by certain people*. One alternative is to use 'he' sometimes and 'she' other times, so as to balance.
Trouble is, the guidance I have seen on the topic advocate switching genders with each example, paragraph, or section. Not within the same sentence, for the love of English. For what it's worth, the author does seem to shed this disability by the end of the 'Jerk' section. Ironically, that's when he uses a female pronoun in a metaphor involving dogs.
Clearly, the only sensible explaination is that the author once got accused of written sexual harassment, and got trapped in some sort of sensitivity training program, for months, if not years.
* It is my understanding that this used to be acceptable, but I don't know how long ago it was. For all I know, it could be from the days where double negatives were used for emphasis.
Exactly. I am wondering if that 20% includes my new laptop which I bought on Friday. It came with Windows 7, and I overwrote it with Linux Mint within an hour of bringing it home.
I would have set it up to dual-boot, but the overzealous factory reset configuration on my previous netbook has caused me a world of headache that I have no time for, presently.
GP is running the crippled "Starter" edition which is what is typically installed on netbooks. I don't have it myself, but I saw it first hand when trying to help a 13-year-old with her new computer on Christmas day. She was nonplussed.
If the ad suggests that your donation is for wikipedia, it is reasonable to suppose that the donation will be applied only to wikipedia, not split between a variety of wikimedia projects, most of which many wikipedia viewers have never heard.
Have you never heard of "having a face for radio"? I promise you: if you could see the faces of NPR hosts as they broadcast, you would be thoroughly creeped out.
As far as I can tell, I was given the option when I got my first (5, insightful) moderation. Similar circumstances eventually brought me the karma-bonus modifier. Far from self-destructive, I see it as a self-preserving behavior: No one will come to the site (and view the ads) if all the conversation is rubbish. This affirms those who make "positive contributions", and encourages them to continue coming to the site and elevating the level of discourse.
Good point, the free market can sort this out. I'll just dump comcast and sign up with my local dial up. That'll show them.
I have done this, since Satellite is my only alternative to Comcast and it is even more expensive (Right now, Comcast's best offer in my neighborhood is 5Mbps for $60/mo). I get my broadband fix at work and McDonald's.
Hear, hear! It is one thing to provide quality of service filtering to make sure that all users have reasonable access. It is quite another thing for one user to have different qualities of service based on content.
The article mentioned in the summary is the first non-vested-interest opinion against net neutrality which I have ever read. I was surprised when I read of his opposition to the Internet being treated "like a public utility." I was under the impression that the motivation behind net neutrality is one which parallels phone services' requirements in performing duties as a common carrier. I don't understand why this is a bad thing, or how it is supposed to chill innovation and investment.
Makes me wonder if there is some side of the debate that I am missing.
One does not necessarily follow from the other. At most, it means that barter is a type of revenue that should be reported. Do you know how one might report such revenue? Do you know if there are systems in place to pay taxes in kind? Do you have any references on these issues?
For what it's worth, the only reason I can see for downmodding the above was that it did not provide a direct link to Bitcoin. That way, it was marginally less useful than it could have been. Bitcoin is an interesting project, and relevant to the problem of the single point of control/failure that we have with transactions going through Visa et al.
I am immensely tickled to hear that steam power is still being used in some modern context, even if I only learn of it as it is being phased out. I had never realized that this was how aircraft carrier slingshots worked. Are there any other interesting uses of steam power these days, outside of electricity production?
Actually, Comcast is currently conducting trials of IPv6 with their subscribers. I am not participating right now because I had to cancel my service, but I was very close to participating six months ago.
How would you know if it suited your needs without knowing what it is? That, was my point, not if it was the panacea for data storage.
That is a fair point, but my point was this: If my needs (or paranoias) are beyond this service, then I gain nothing by knowing about it. Except maybe to advise others who might be looking for such a service.
Sorry if I was harsh. I was a bit tired at the time, and put off by your misapprehension of my writing. I can see that Dropbox has its place, and I will readily own that code-oriented version control does feel like overkill with static collections of files like photos.:c)
Hum. So now hopefully we're on the same page, and can have a more constructive conversation.
It is an interesting service. The fact that they don't provide more concise information about their service rubs me the wrong way, but by this point I do know what the service does (mostly from reading the thread here), and it would be a shame to write off a company for not meeting my expectations. My main reservation in using the service is, in fact, the business of plopping a slew of personal files on someone else's server, particularly one with a TOS that has clauses like Dropbox does. But using TrueCrypt ought to resolve most of that, so maybe when I have time to play with both of them, I will give it a go.
It's an infinitely more simple solution for me to save an RFC I'm working on at work in my Dropbox, and open the same file from home than it is for me to lug a laptop around, or copy it to a USB drive, or VPN in, or RDP in, or whatever other TLA you want to use to get access to it at home.
Fixed that for you.;c)
If you want to use a hammer, use a hammer. But don't shit on a screwdriver for not being a hammer.
I was going to try to compose some witty play on, "When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." But I think I have something more constructive. It's just a thought I had; I'm not trying to drive a point home any more, just developing ideas. Maybe you'll have an opinion on it?
I was reading "Beating the Averages" earlier today; it is an essay by Paul Graham, about his experience developing Viaweb. (Viaweb was his product as a first-mover in the online store genre of services. Viaweb was eventually purchased by Yahoo to become Yahoo Store.) He talks about what it means for one language to be more powerful than another.
He makes this interesting inductive argument about the relative power of programming languages. That is, there is an ordering '>' where for languages A and B, a person who is very familiar with both languages can say, 'B>A', meaning, "B is more powerful than A." The metric he seems to use is something like this: If a person uses B and knows the features of A, they might say, "How can you get anything done in A? It doesn't have feature x."
He claims that you should usually use the most powerful language for the job. The article is in the context of a dotcom startup, so he basically defines power as productivity in development (speed in adding features, that kind of thing). However, he acknowledges that for certain problems (simple throwaway programs, specialized number crunching, and other particular applications) a certain language may be more appropriate, even if it is less powerful by the normal metric. (For instance, FORTRAN might be better for number crunching than many languages that provide better tools for development.)
Crap. This is getting long. Where was I going with this? Oh, yeah. I view version control systems as more powerful than Dropbox. But many people don't need the advanced features of a system like git or subversion. Moreover, they are just likely to get in the way of someone who doesn't care. It is also nice in certain contexts
Slashdot Mirror
Or maybe, "it bugs me when dutch/belgians don't"? Also, I'm pretty sure that Dutch, English, Belgian, and Nazi should be capitalized. Not sure about the last one, since you're not talking about the Third Reich. What is more,
...if it's not pointed out, you don't know you've made a mistake, so you keep on making it.
Hope this helps. :c)
My first CS class (when I transferred from a community college to university) was CS 101, Software Engineering (in Java). We were using Eclipse on Windows, in the lab. Our undergraduate TA offered an optional session wherin he walked us through the experience of logging in to the department's Linux server, then coding, compiling, and running a simple Java program there. I had used Linux on the desktop before, but never for programming, and certainly not over ssh. It was illuminating, and I fell in love. I try to avoid Java lately, but use Linux every day.
Some people here are moaning that if students don't know Linux by the point they take this class, they shouldn't be in Computer Science. But one has to learn somewhere, and I think that learning from a peer (like an undergraduate TA) is an excellent place for initial exposure.
The student is tutoring in a lab, not teaching. There is a professor delivering the main lectures and watching over the sophomore tutor.
Well, if you wanted to, you could set up a social networking site for paranoid conspiracy theorists
But then I could only socially network with paranoid conspiracy theorists!
Maybe T-Mobile doesn't, but BT does. ("Take your home broadband with you.") I doubt that many users think about the difference.
Unfortunately, current gene-backup technology is rather lossy.
Like this, but with servers: What if dead bodies stayed where they died?
"Yes, mama. Google Lattitude says he's still in the graveyard."
#2. Addicted to coke - Seriously, why is this even in the article? Where's the editor?
The editor says the author just raised $650 million, so it must be in there for a reason.
Also, what was up with the mixing of “he” and “she”. I don’t know why, but I found this very distracting.
The reason for the combination was almost assuredly an attempt to avoid sexist language. I agree that is was tremendously distracting. Using 'he' all the time is sexist (using only 'she' could be construed even worse, I suppose, since we're talking about jerks); using '(s)he', 'she/he', 'xe', etc. is bizzarre and awkward; and using truly neutral pronouns like 'they' is frowned upon by certain people*. One alternative is to use 'he' sometimes and 'she' other times, so as to balance.
Trouble is, the guidance I have seen on the topic advocate switching genders with each example, paragraph, or section. Not within the same sentence, for the love of English. For what it's worth, the author does seem to shed this disability by the end of the 'Jerk' section. Ironically, that's when he uses a female pronoun in a metaphor involving dogs.
Clearly, the only sensible explaination is that the author once got accused of written sexual harassment, and got trapped in some sort of sensitivity training program, for months, if not years.
* It is my understanding that this used to be acceptable, but I don't know how long ago it was. For all I know, it could be from the days where double negatives were used for emphasis.
Exactly. I am wondering if that 20% includes my new laptop which I bought on Friday. It came with Windows 7, and I overwrote it with Linux Mint within an hour of bringing it home.
I would have set it up to dual-boot, but the overzealous factory reset configuration on my previous netbook has caused me a world of headache that I have no time for, presently.
GP is running the crippled "Starter" edition which is what is typically installed on netbooks. I don't have it myself, but I saw it first hand when trying to help a 13-year-old with her new computer on Christmas day. She was nonplussed.
If the ad suggests that your donation is for wikipedia, it is reasonable to suppose that the donation will be applied only to wikipedia, not split between a variety of wikimedia projects, most of which many wikipedia viewers have never heard.
Have you never heard of "having a face for radio"? I promise you: if you could see the faces of NPR hosts as they broadcast, you would be thoroughly creeped out.
Yet another argument for viewing the site over a secure connection.
As far as I can tell, I was given the option when I got my first (5, insightful) moderation. Similar circumstances eventually brought me the karma-bonus modifier. Far from self-destructive, I see it as a self-preserving behavior: No one will come to the site (and view the ads) if all the conversation is rubbish. This affirms those who make "positive contributions", and encourages them to continue coming to the site and elevating the level of discourse.
I'm looking to buy. What ISPs serve your swamp?
Good point, the free market can sort this out. I'll just dump comcast and sign up with my local dial up. That'll show them.
I have done this, since Satellite is my only alternative to Comcast and it is even more expensive (Right now, Comcast's best offer in my neighborhood is 5Mbps for $60/mo). I get my broadband fix at work and McDonald's.
Hear, hear! It is one thing to provide quality of service filtering to make sure that all users have reasonable access. It is quite another thing for one user to have different qualities of service based on content.
The article mentioned in the summary is the first non-vested-interest opinion against net neutrality which I have ever read. I was surprised when I read of his opposition to the Internet being treated "like a public utility." I was under the impression that the motivation behind net neutrality is one which parallels phone services' requirements in performing duties as a common carrier. I don't understand why this is a bad thing, or how it is supposed to chill innovation and investment.
Makes me wonder if there is some side of the debate that I am missing.
One does not necessarily follow from the other. At most, it means that barter is a type of revenue that should be reported. Do you know how one might report such revenue? Do you know if there are systems in place to pay taxes in kind? Do you have any references on these issues?
For what it's worth, the only reason I can see for downmodding the above was that it did not provide a direct link to Bitcoin. That way, it was marginally less useful than it could have been. Bitcoin is an interesting project, and relevant to the problem of the single point of control/failure that we have with transactions going through Visa et al.
Because my chickens have tattooed circuits on their thighs that outwit counterfeiters. Have you ever seen a rat with a verification tattoo?
I am immensely tickled to hear that steam power is still being used in some modern context, even if I only learn of it as it is being phased out. I had never realized that this was how aircraft carrier slingshots worked. Are there any other interesting uses of steam power these days, outside of electricity production?
Actually, Comcast is currently conducting trials of IPv6 with their subscribers. I am not participating right now because I had to cancel my service, but I was very close to participating six months ago.
How would you know if it suited your needs without knowing what it is? That, was my point, not if it was the panacea for data storage.
That is a fair point, but my point was this: If my needs (or paranoias) are beyond this service, then I gain nothing by knowing about it. Except maybe to advise others who might be looking for such a service.
Sorry if I was harsh. I was a bit tired at the time, and put off by your misapprehension of my writing. I can see that Dropbox has its place, and I will readily own that code-oriented version control does feel like overkill with static collections of files like photos. :c)
Hum. So now hopefully we're on the same page, and can have a more constructive conversation.
It is an interesting service. The fact that they don't provide more concise information about their service rubs me the wrong way, but by this point I do know what the service does (mostly from reading the thread here), and it would be a shame to write off a company for not meeting my expectations. My main reservation in using the service is, in fact, the business of plopping a slew of personal files on someone else's server, particularly one with a TOS that has clauses like Dropbox does. But using TrueCrypt ought to resolve most of that, so maybe when I have time to play with both of them, I will give it a go.
It's an infinitely more simple solution for me to save an RFC I'm working on at work in my Dropbox, and open the same file from home than it is for me to lug a laptop around, or copy it to a USB drive, or VPN in, or RDP in, or whatever other TLA you want to use to get access to it at home.
Fixed that for you. ;c)
If you want to use a hammer, use a hammer. But don't shit on a screwdriver for not being a hammer.
I was going to try to compose some witty play on, "When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail." But I think I have something more constructive. It's just a thought I had; I'm not trying to drive a point home any more, just developing ideas. Maybe you'll have an opinion on it?
I was reading "Beating the Averages" earlier today; it is an essay by Paul Graham, about his experience developing Viaweb. (Viaweb was his product as a first-mover in the online store genre of services. Viaweb was eventually purchased by Yahoo to become Yahoo Store.) He talks about what it means for one language to be more powerful than another.
He makes this interesting inductive argument about the relative power of programming languages. That is, there is an ordering '>' where for languages A and B, a person who is very familiar with both languages can say, 'B>A', meaning, "B is more powerful than A." The metric he seems to use is something like this: If a person uses B and knows the features of A, they might say, "How can you get anything done in A? It doesn't have feature x."
He claims that you should usually use the most powerful language for the job. The article is in the context of a dotcom startup, so he basically defines power as productivity in development (speed in adding features, that kind of thing). However, he acknowledges that for certain problems (simple throwaway programs, specialized number crunching, and other particular applications) a certain language may be more appropriate, even if it is less powerful by the normal metric. (For instance, FORTRAN might be better for number crunching than many languages that provide better tools for development.)
Crap. This is getting long. Where was I going with this? Oh, yeah. I view version control systems as more powerful than Dropbox. But many people don't need the advanced features of a system like git or subversion. Moreover, they are just likely to get in the way of someone who doesn't care. It is also nice in certain contexts