Imperial, huh? Okay... If the measurement they gave in grams in the article was precise, you can take your pick of imperial measurement here... either 308.65 grains, 11.29 drams, 12.86 pennyweights, or 15.43 scruples.
Traditionally, websites that are the most affected by user not running flash are most often highly entertainment-oriented.
Javascript, however, is used extremely often on all kinds of websites... not just for entertainment, but for online commerce in many industries, electronic banking, as well as simply getting useful functionality from many online bulletin boards and forums covering the entire gamut of possible subjects. Especially when you start looking at asynch javascript calls, and look at how the modern web is built, you'll find it's almost ubiquitous. Running noscript, I found I was having to make exceptions *constantly* just to have usable functionality in the various websites that I visited, making having it installed and operation far more of an inconvenience than it was worth.
I'm not saying that one wouldn't save money by walking or cycling... I'm saying that the suggestion that one do so is rarely a practical one because of the significant convenience that driving offers - which may easily be *worth* that amount of money anyways.
That's about on par with the suggestion that people can save a lot of money on gasoline by walking to work or cycling.
My point being that the recommendation carries with it a set of disadvantages that heavily weigh against it when it comes to convenience. Much of the modern web today is not usable in any practical sense without javascript. If you can manage without it, that's nice... have a cookie. Just because you only visit websites that only present archaic interfaces doesn't mean everybody else does.
What if instead of exchanging it for cash, you just paid with bitcoin directly because you found somebody who was willing to take that, for all practical purposes, as barter?
True, but it's still not likely to be as much of a bother as some people think it will be. There's already regulations about unduly disturbing other passengers... and if your cell phone isn't good enough to pick up your voice at a normal conversation level, then perhaps yeah... you'll just have to wait until you land.
So I guess you'd be equally opposed to allowing a person who was sitting near you to simply be talking casually to the person who was sitting beside them.
It's still a conversation that you're not a part of... you're still being forced to hear it by sole virtue of your proximity to them... or maybe, they should be forced to both get up from their seats and have their conversation further away from you?
Rather than prohibiting cell phones, it would make much more sense to be prohibitive of unnecessarily raising your voice and disturbing other passengers. Oh look, that's already a thing in situations where it gets to be a problem.
"...saying it might not be "fair" to consumers to have to listen to other passengers talk on the phone throughout a long flight"
In practice, I think the noise level from chatter would generally be far higher from people simply talking to those they are traveling with them than it would be from people with cell phones. No worse, for instance, than what you might expect on public transit, where cell phones are entirely allowed.. but with the provision that people are still expected to keep their voices at a reasonable level (I've actually seen a person on transit get reprimanded by complete strangers for talking too loudly on their phone once... the embarrassment of the situation alone, I think, was what made the person be completely quite thereafter).
Serious question, and probably a bit offtopic here, but could anyone who actually has a real understanding of how the law works explain in layman's terms what is really gained in society by considering corporations as people? I can imagine there must be some benefit, but I'm not sure what it is.
I agree with most of your points above, but I wanted to point out that the issue with tools and animals is not so much in the ability to use them, but the ability to craft them... to take existing resources and combine or modify them in some way as to be fit for a specific class of purposes, and *then* to use said tool. Many animals can use tools, taking something which already exists in a state that is suitably fit for some purpose which may not itself be part of nature, and using it for such, but there are, as far as I am aware, only isolated cases of animals actually crafting tools in nature, specific only to the individual creature so discovered doing so, and this trait is not generally shared even by others of the exact same species.
I've noticed a big difference in commercials since this came into effect, and I've really appreciated not having to turn down the volume as soon as commercials start only to have to turn it up again when the commercials are over, or worse... accidentally forgetting to do this and being blasted with the first commercial of a commercial break.
That said... I notice every once in a while that I encounter a commercial that isn't playing by these rules... and it's always ones by the same companies... so while it's definitely better than it was, it's not as good as it could be (Visa commercials are probably the most grievous sinners in this department in my experience).
They probably don't trounce any powerful, but strictly text-editing editor's capability in that regard... what they trounce is such editor's ability to assist a competent programmer at being more productive than they would otherwise be if all they had were such an editor.
Mp>
What I am is somebody who takes offense at the idea that a person might actually be more productive at their job when they use certain types of tools is somehow less competent as a computer programmer. I still fail to see what using an IDE has to do with what is evidently likened to mindlessly pushing buttons.
Also, if the best you can do is insult somebody who doesn't happen to share your values about what the best tools are to use instead of actually specifically addressing the issue being discussed, then it's fairly clear that you don't have any real argument.
As for your "GTFO" concluding remark, why on earth anyone would you ever expect anyone to acquiesce to such an imperative given by a complete stranger on the internet that they will never actually meet? And if you didn't expect acquiescence to the command, why on earth would you have ever given it, short of some sort of desire to use an expletive to make yourself sound tougher than what is remotely possible to achieve while you are still completely anonymous? It's not entirely unheard of in the real world for similar such blustering to be little more than compensation for certain types of personal flaws or insecurities. I don't know you well enough to honestly say what those flaws or insecurities might be, but I can well imagine.
Not necessarily... what it means is that stuff that isn't necessary, like fetching stuff from a mailbox that couldn't be sent directly to their door, will just sit there... and all kinds of mail, not just junk, will sit completely unopened... bills, addressed mail from friends and relatives, or even stuff from the government will just sit there... because they never needed to ever have to make any special trips to pick up mail before.
What are the most noteworthy features of vim that you have noted are missing from other editors? Or is it vim's modality that appeals to you most (in which case, even very basic notepad-style editors would be inferior)?
Why in the world would using an IDE make you code at 1/5 of your normal speed? Functionally, and for the most part, an IDE is primarily just a text editor... it just happens to have features which can make doing certain operations faster than doing them in an editor that wasn't as programming language-aware as IDE's often are. When you aren't using any of the features specific to the IDE, why would it slow you down at all?
Slashdot Mirror
Imperial, huh? Okay... If the measurement they gave in grams in the article was precise, you can take your pick of imperial measurement here... either 308.65 grains, 11.29 drams, 12.86 pennyweights, or 15.43 scruples.
This was the first thing I thought of.
Okay... so maybe I'm the fan. Still found it hard to ignore that Delfly sounds like an abbreviated form of "Delta Flyer".
Just because you might be satisfied with a clunky user interface does not mean everybody else ought to be.
Since when does something being unconstitutional stop such agencies from doing whatever the heck they want in the 21st century?
Traditionally, websites that are the most affected by user not running flash are most often highly entertainment-oriented.
Javascript, however, is used extremely often on all kinds of websites... not just for entertainment, but for online commerce in many industries, electronic banking, as well as simply getting useful functionality from many online bulletin boards and forums covering the entire gamut of possible subjects. Especially when you start looking at asynch javascript calls, and look at how the modern web is built, you'll find it's almost ubiquitous. Running noscript, I found I was having to make exceptions *constantly* just to have usable functionality in the various websites that I visited, making having it installed and operation far more of an inconvenience than it was worth.
I'm not saying that one wouldn't save money by walking or cycling... I'm saying that the suggestion that one do so is rarely a practical one because of the significant convenience that driving offers - which may easily be *worth* that amount of money anyways.
That's about on par with the suggestion that people can save a lot of money on gasoline by walking to work or cycling.
My point being that the recommendation carries with it a set of disadvantages that heavily weigh against it when it comes to convenience. Much of the modern web today is not usable in any practical sense without javascript. If you can manage without it, that's nice... have a cookie. Just because you only visit websites that only present archaic interfaces doesn't mean everybody else does.
What if instead of exchanging it for cash, you just paid with bitcoin directly because you found somebody who was willing to take that, for all practical purposes, as barter?
Both are important... for different reasons. Concentrating on one to the exclusion of the other is what is bad.
I thought there was only a difference of an hour during DST months, which December is not... at least not in the northern hemisphere.
UTC is the time in Greenwich, which is in England. You can't really get any *more* English.
True, but it's still not likely to be as much of a bother as some people think it will be. There's already regulations about unduly disturbing other passengers... and if your cell phone isn't good enough to pick up your voice at a normal conversation level, then perhaps yeah... you'll just have to wait until you land.
So I guess you'd be equally opposed to allowing a person who was sitting near you to simply be talking casually to the person who was sitting beside them.
It's still a conversation that you're not a part of... you're still being forced to hear it by sole virtue of your proximity to them... or maybe, they should be forced to both get up from their seats and have their conversation further away from you?
Rather than prohibiting cell phones, it would make much more sense to be prohibitive of unnecessarily raising your voice and disturbing other passengers. Oh look, that's already a thing in situations where it gets to be a problem.
In practice, I think the noise level from chatter would generally be far higher from people simply talking to those they are traveling with them than it would be from people with cell phones. No worse, for instance, than what you might expect on public transit, where cell phones are entirely allowed.. but with the provision that people are still expected to keep their voices at a reasonable level (I've actually seen a person on transit get reprimanded by complete strangers for talking too loudly on their phone once... the embarrassment of the situation alone, I think, was what made the person be completely quite thereafter).
That is an excellent example of an isolated case like I was talking about. The trait is not generally shared by crows... most will not do that.
Serious question, and probably a bit offtopic here, but could anyone who actually has a real understanding of how the law works explain in layman's terms what is really gained in society by considering corporations as people? I can imagine there must be some benefit, but I'm not sure what it is.
I agree with most of your points above, but I wanted to point out that the issue with tools and animals is not so much in the ability to use them, but the ability to craft them... to take existing resources and combine or modify them in some way as to be fit for a specific class of purposes, and *then* to use said tool. Many animals can use tools, taking something which already exists in a state that is suitably fit for some purpose which may not itself be part of nature, and using it for such, but there are, as far as I am aware, only isolated cases of animals actually crafting tools in nature, specific only to the individual creature so discovered doing so, and this trait is not generally shared even by others of the exact same species.
That said... I notice every once in a while that I encounter a commercial that isn't playing by these rules... and it's always ones by the same companies... so while it's definitely better than it was, it's not as good as it could be (Visa commercials are probably the most grievous sinners in this department in my experience).
They probably don't trounce any powerful, but strictly text-editing editor's capability in that regard... what they trounce is such editor's ability to assist a competent programmer at being more productive than they would otherwise be if all they had were such an editor.
Also, if the best you can do is insult somebody who doesn't happen to share your values about what the best tools are to use instead of actually specifically addressing the issue being discussed, then it's fairly clear that you don't have any real argument.
As for your "GTFO" concluding remark, why on earth anyone would you ever expect anyone to acquiesce to such an imperative given by a complete stranger on the internet that they will never actually meet? And if you didn't expect acquiescence to the command, why on earth would you have ever given it, short of some sort of desire to use an expletive to make yourself sound tougher than what is remotely possible to achieve while you are still completely anonymous? It's not entirely unheard of in the real world for similar such blustering to be little more than compensation for certain types of personal flaws or insecurities. I don't know you well enough to honestly say what those flaws or insecurities might be, but I can well imagine.
Not necessarily... what it means is that stuff that isn't necessary, like fetching stuff from a mailbox that couldn't be sent directly to their door, will just sit there... and all kinds of mail, not just junk, will sit completely unopened... bills, addressed mail from friends and relatives, or even stuff from the government will just sit there... because they never needed to ever have to make any special trips to pick up mail before.
Especially people who are disabled or elderly and are very well accustomed to having mail delivered right to their door...
So any mail they get through normal post will just sit and accumulate in their box... essentially turning these community boxes into a litter farm.
What are the most noteworthy features of vim that you have noted are missing from other editors? Or is it vim's modality that appeals to you most (in which case, even very basic notepad-style editors would be inferior)?
Why in the world would using an IDE make you code at 1/5 of your normal speed? Functionally, and for the most part, an IDE is primarily just a text editor... it just happens to have features which can make doing certain operations faster than doing them in an editor that wasn't as programming language-aware as IDE's often are. When you aren't using any of the features specific to the IDE, why would it slow you down at all?