You're being silly. That print statement thing was easy to be compatible between versions. (The 3.x versions make print a standard function, so you need to remember the parenthesis, but you can use them in 2.x.)
If you want to complain about something that really changed significantly, talk about string representation. That causes some real problems.
Depends on what you're doing. For some things JavaScript is the easy way to go, for other's it's damn near impossible. Sometimes I can even see *why* they made it so difficult. Would you want an ordinary web page to freely access your hard disk?
I don't know Javascript, but Ruby is deficient in error checking. When I use it sometimes all I can be sure of is "somewhere in that program I didn't properly close a parenthesis, or left out an 'end'". This can be annoying when the program is several pages long. Recently I ran into a problem with some code I had written in Ruby a month ago, and the easiest way to solve it was to translate the code into Python...which didn't, in the end, turn out to be any longer than the original Ruby. (Well, the actual problem was the data format...I had gotten interrupted in the middle of changing the program into something that would scale better. But the error messages were hopelessly bad, so it looked like a program problem.)
P.S.: The Python program is easier to understand, but that may be because I've written it more recently.
Javascript *is* the wrong way to go, but C really needs to be replaced with a language that can check for fence-post errors, and where you can tell when a value is a pointer rather than an integer. (Note I said "can'. This should be a compiler switch so that you can optimze the check away after everything is debugged.)
Somehow every new language seems to try to be an improved C++ rather than an improved C. This is a mistake. And improved C is just as needed as an improved C++...and would be a lot easier to do. You could even have it be almost the same as C, with most programs being identical between the two, and with the same meaning. But you can't call it C, because it would severely break many standard C idioms. And D's been used for a reasonable C++ replacement. Perhaps concentrate on making it easily debuggable and call it "ecstaCy". (That should be searchable for on the web.)
You were never an Algol programmer, either that or you never used Logo. The syntax of Logo seems simple until you try to use it for something a bit complicated. The syntax of Algol *is* simple. OTOH it doesn't have many standard libraries, which make it so limited it's basically useless except for instruction. (It could have, but the designers intentionally stripped out basic features without moving them into standard libraries. Whoops! [They moved them into libraries, but didn't standardize them. So you got all sorts of dialect differences almost immediately.])
FWIW, I rather liked BC-Algol, but debugging was horrible. But when compared to Fortran it was lamentably lacking in libraries.
I'm considering that, but it's a clearly worse option than the bookmarks sidebar. Konqueor has a bookmarks sidebar, but it doesn't seem to handle folders within the bookmarks sidebar. Minimalist GUIs are basically unusable for my use case. SeaMonkey worked fine as of 2000, but I think I may now be having more tabs open most of the time than it could then handle, and the current default version doesn't run on a 64-bit system. (I've downloaded a custom build, and may switch to that, but I haven't tested it yet. I *am*, however, still looking for alternatives to compare.)
P.S.: I don't need, or bloody *want* a GUI designed for a touchscreen tablet. That minimalist garbage is, to me, just garbage. If I can't come up with a better answer I may start running the browser in a virtual machine, awkward as that would be.
It is always my suspicion that telemetry is being used as an excuse to justify decisions made for other reasons...though sometimes I'm at a loss to guess *what* those other reasons were. Often it just seems to be "I'm bored with the current layout, so let's change something.".
If *that's* the case, they care clearly ignoring it. FWIW, I *don't* have telemetry turned off, but recent builds of FireFox have gotten so much worse that even with the cost of rebuilding my bookmarks I'm starting to consider switching browsers. (For me that's a considerable cost, too. I've probably got over 1000 bookmarked sites that I occasionally visit, carefully organized into folders by topic.) And I've found the bookmarks sidebar to be one of the most useful features.
Anybody have a decent suggestion for a replacement browser on a 64-bit Linux system? Konqueror doesn't do a good job of displaying svg files. Most of the ones that I've looked at have a stripped down set of controls. Perhaps it's time to try SeaMonkey again, and see if they've got a 64-bit version working now...but I notice that it's still not in the Debian repository.
FWIW there were also reports of ships in the Black Sea being "out of position" for several days. I didn't read of any accidents, but GPS hacking was suspected.
The problem with that thesis is that paying for quality work doesn't guarantee that you get quality work. And you have already specified that the people in charge can't tell the difference.
This is why the school of management that says "a good manager can manage anything" is wrong. A good manager can manage managers, because he recognizes good management. A good carpenter is not necessarily a good manager, but can recognize another good carpenter. So good middle management is the important part...but top management can only recognize the "good management" part of the equation.
P.S.: The above a a synopsis of the fallacy of "general intelligence". There isn't any such thing. There are specific skill sets. Having lots of skill sets makes you intelligent in those areas, and one of those areas of skill had better be getting your skill sets to work together.
What you need to remember is that car keys come in so few variations that burglars can carry a complete set. So don't expect detailed recognition. Probably they'd reject, say, 90% of the people who weren't you. As long as this is only used for local access that's probably "usually good enough".
It's not clear that no human could drive more safely than do the current cars. It *may* be true, but people could drive more safely by being careful and avoiding dangerous circumstances, which they are much more widely, if not quickly, aware of than "automated cars" currently are.
FWIW, it's not clear to me just *what* the state of the art "automated car" can do by way of driving. But it is clear that many people show an incredible ability to be unaware of dangers. I also suspect that an automated car would be a safer driver than I would be...except that I'm an extremely safe driver because I won't. I consider myself too dangerous. (I tend to get lost in thought when the drive is boring, and not notice changes.)
Actually, the Ford guy has a valid point. He probably doesn't want to talk about it, but it *is* valid. When the car drives itself, do you provide controls? What percentage of people are going to own a car, and how many will just use an automated taxi when needed. Etc.
Note that many of these changes are dependent on social decisions that haven't been made, but might be. E.g., if rush hour goes away, then the "I'll depend on a taxi" option becomes more viable. If it doesn't, then micro-buses dominate. But some people will need personal cars. Salesmen, e.g.
If people aren't driving, how many want an SUV? How do you know?
Actually, search up should also imply you checked through the library and any reasonable place to find records. The "up" suffix usually means "to completion". But a lot of people now seem to expect to find everything on the internet, and that would make "search up" reasonable for "to search (all) the internet". And "climb up the tree" doesn't mean you climb higher than the branches will support you, so it would be reasonable to use "search up" to mean "do sufficient search". If you've misplaced your keys, you wouldn't "google them" but you might "search them up"...which would seem to mean a successful search, so perhaps "search up the internet" would only apply to successful searches.
Be interesting to see how (and if) "search up" develops its meaning.
I rather liked AltaVista. For the first few years I preferred it to Google, until Google got a bit smarter about how it searched. At first Google had problems with excluding search terms, so, e.g., you couldn't search for "stars and not movies".
They won the case, but they had to defend it in court. I think, however, it only got up to the appellate level (i.e., not even circuit court). But it was a hard fight. After then they started marking all their boxes "Kleenex facial tissue", and for all I know supporting Scott's with *their* "Scotties facial tissue".
Slavery was vile, but it was politically impossible to get rid of it in the late 1700's, so yes, bugger, but bigger than allowing slavery. (But the federal government should have been allowed to tax slaveholders for their slaves.)
Bigger than Vietnam? Sorry, but Vietnam isn't even up as one of the major mistakes made by the government. It merely looks that way because many here lived through that time.
Bigger than leaded gasoline? Well, *MAYBE* not. That was a huge mistake, and no question about it. We haven't really counted the costs yet, and may never be able to.
The question is, "What else is Trump going to do?". If he dissolves into ineffectiveness, then he might even be a lesser mistake than Vietnam. Unfortunately, there are other possibilities. Of which nuclear war is but one.
It doesn't appear to be a trademark suit, though that will naturally be an element, but a "look and feel" copyright suit. It's got a lot more basis that the suit on round-cornered rectangles the got so much press last year..
I don't believe you either, but the thing is, while the Nazis hadn't come to power they didn't do all that much torturing people either. They merely advocated it. Even after they came to power it took them awhile to really work things up. Things don't happen instantaneously.
So. I'm troubled that this is happening, because with IP numbers so limited it's difficult to post on the new without the support of a webhost. This is a dubious method of social control, and should be resisted. But to defend the neo-nazis is a truly appalling choice...and not because they call themselves neo-nazis, but because they preach violent racial hate. *THEY* are the ones who called themselves Nazis. Others using the same name for them (with the addition of neo-) is just accepting the label they have claimed. I could more reasonably object to many people being called Christian, as the neo-nazis at least claim many of the same doctrines as the originals did.
Slashdot Mirror
And to evaluate properly you need a test system that you can expose to the update. When you only have one system, that doesn't work so well.
You're being silly. That print statement thing was easy to be compatible between versions. (The 3.x versions make print a standard function, so you need to remember the parenthesis, but you can use them in 2.x.)
If you want to complain about something that really changed significantly, talk about string representation. That causes some real problems.
Depends on what you're doing. For some things JavaScript is the easy way to go, for other's it's damn near impossible. Sometimes I can even see *why* they made it so difficult. Would you want an ordinary web page to freely access your hard disk?
I don't know Javascript, but Ruby is deficient in error checking. When I use it sometimes all I can be sure of is "somewhere in that program I didn't properly close a parenthesis, or left out an 'end'". This can be annoying when the program is several pages long. Recently I ran into a problem with some code I had written in Ruby a month ago, and the easiest way to solve it was to translate the code into Python...which didn't, in the end, turn out to be any longer than the original Ruby. (Well, the actual problem was the data format...I had gotten interrupted in the middle of changing the program into something that would scale better. But the error messages were hopelessly bad, so it looked like a program problem.)
P.S.: The Python program is easier to understand, but that may be because I've written it more recently.
Javascript *is* the wrong way to go, but C really needs to be replaced with a language that can check for fence-post errors, and where you can tell when a value is a pointer rather than an integer. (Note I said "can'. This should be a compiler switch so that you can optimze the check away after everything is debugged.)
Somehow every new language seems to try to be an improved C++ rather than an improved C. This is a mistake. And improved C is just as needed as an improved C++...and would be a lot easier to do. You could even have it be almost the same as C, with most programs being identical between the two, and with the same meaning. But you can't call it C, because it would severely break many standard C idioms. And D's been used for a reasonable C++ replacement. Perhaps concentrate on making it easily debuggable and call it "ecstaCy". (That should be searchable for on the web.)
You were never an Algol programmer, either that or you never used Logo. The syntax of Logo seems simple until you try to use it for something a bit complicated. The syntax of Algol *is* simple. OTOH it doesn't have many standard libraries, which make it so limited it's basically useless except for instruction. (It could have, but the designers intentionally stripped out basic features without moving them into standard libraries. Whoops! [They moved them into libraries, but didn't standardize them. So you got all sorts of dialect differences almost immediately.])
FWIW, I rather liked BC-Algol, but debugging was horrible. But when compared to Fortran it was lamentably lacking in libraries.
I'm considering that, but it's a clearly worse option than the bookmarks sidebar. Konqueor has a bookmarks sidebar, but it doesn't seem to handle folders within the bookmarks sidebar. Minimalist GUIs are basically unusable for my use case. SeaMonkey worked fine as of 2000, but I think I may now be having more tabs open most of the time than it could then handle, and the current default version doesn't run on a 64-bit system. (I've downloaded a custom build, and may switch to that, but I haven't tested it yet. I *am*, however, still looking for alternatives to compare.)
P.S.: I don't need, or bloody *want* a GUI designed for a touchscreen tablet. That minimalist garbage is, to me, just garbage. If I can't come up with a better answer I may start running the browser in a virtual machine, awkward as that would be.
Google does *lots* of things. They don't *all* spy on you.
OTOH, I didn't search out what the RAPPAR project is or does. It's quite possible that's one of the many that *do* spy on you.
It is always my suspicion that telemetry is being used as an excuse to justify decisions made for other reasons...though sometimes I'm at a loss to guess *what* those other reasons were. Often it just seems to be "I'm bored with the current layout, so let's change something.".
If *that's* the case, they care clearly ignoring it. FWIW, I *don't* have telemetry turned off, but recent builds of FireFox have gotten so much worse that even with the cost of rebuilding my bookmarks I'm starting to consider switching browsers. (For me that's a considerable cost, too. I've probably got over 1000 bookmarked sites that I occasionally visit, carefully organized into folders by topic.) And I've found the bookmarks sidebar to be one of the most useful features.
Anybody have a decent suggestion for a replacement browser on a 64-bit Linux system? Konqueror doesn't do a good job of displaying svg files. Most of the ones that I've looked at have a stripped down set of controls. Perhaps it's time to try SeaMonkey again, and see if they've got a 64-bit version working now...but I notice that it's still not in the Debian repository.
Last time I tried SeaMonkey I could neither build nor install it. (They didn't have a pre-built 64-bit version.)
FWIW there were also reports of ships in the Black Sea being "out of position" for several days. I didn't read of any accidents, but GPS hacking was suspected.
The problem with that thesis is that paying for quality work doesn't guarantee that you get quality work. And you have already specified that the people in charge can't tell the difference.
This is why the school of management that says "a good manager can manage anything" is wrong. A good manager can manage managers, because he recognizes good management. A good carpenter is not necessarily a good manager, but can recognize another good carpenter. So good middle management is the important part...but top management can only recognize the "good management" part of the equation.
P.S.: The above a a synopsis of the fallacy of "general intelligence". There isn't any such thing. There are specific skill sets. Having lots of skill sets makes you intelligent in those areas, and one of those areas of skill had better be getting your skill sets to work together.
What you need to remember is that car keys come in so few variations that burglars can carry a complete set. So don't expect detailed recognition. Probably they'd reject, say, 90% of the people who weren't you. As long as this is only used for local access that's probably "usually good enough".
That could work for a signature, or a mouse click. I don't think it would work for fingerprint.
It's not clear that no human could drive more safely than do the current cars. It *may* be true, but people could drive more safely by being careful and avoiding dangerous circumstances, which they are much more widely, if not quickly, aware of than "automated cars" currently are.
FWIW, it's not clear to me just *what* the state of the art "automated car" can do by way of driving. But it is clear that many people show an incredible ability to be unaware of dangers. I also suspect that an automated car would be a safer driver than I would be...except that I'm an extremely safe driver because I won't. I consider myself too dangerous. (I tend to get lost in thought when the drive is boring, and not notice changes.)
Actually, the Ford guy has a valid point. He probably doesn't want to talk about it, but it *is* valid. When the car drives itself, do you provide controls? What percentage of people are going to own a car, and how many will just use an automated taxi when needed. Etc.
Note that many of these changes are dependent on social decisions that haven't been made, but might be. E.g., if rush hour goes away, then the "I'll depend on a taxi" option becomes more viable. If it doesn't, then micro-buses dominate. But some people will need personal cars. Salesmen, e.g.
If people aren't driving, how many want an SUV? How do you know?
Etc.
Actually, search up should also imply you checked through the library and any reasonable place to find records. The "up" suffix usually means "to completion". But a lot of people now seem to expect to find everything on the internet, and that would make "search up" reasonable for "to search (all) the internet". And "climb up the tree" doesn't mean you climb higher than the branches will support you, so it would be reasonable to use "search up" to mean "do sufficient search". If you've misplaced your keys, you wouldn't "google them" but you might "search them up"...which would seem to mean a successful search, so perhaps "search up the internet" would only apply to successful searches.
Be interesting to see how (and if) "search up" develops its meaning.
I rather liked AltaVista. For the first few years I preferred it to Google, until Google got a bit smarter about how it searched. At first Google had problems with excluding search terms, so, e.g., you couldn't search for "stars and not movies".
They won the case, but they had to defend it in court. I think, however, it only got up to the appellate level (i.e., not even circuit court). But it was a hard fight. After then they started marking all their boxes "Kleenex facial tissue", and for all I know supporting Scott's with *their* "Scotties facial tissue".
Slavery was vile, but it was politically impossible to get rid of it in the late 1700's, so yes, bugger, but bigger than allowing slavery. (But the federal government should have been allowed to tax slaveholders for their slaves.)
Bigger than Vietnam? Sorry, but Vietnam isn't even up as one of the major mistakes made by the government. It merely looks that way because many here lived through that time.
Bigger than leaded gasoline? Well, *MAYBE* not. That was a huge mistake, and no question about it. We haven't really counted the costs yet, and may never be able to.
The question is, "What else is Trump going to do?". If he dissolves into ineffectiveness, then he might even be a lesser mistake than Vietnam. Unfortunately, there are other possibilities. Of which nuclear war is but one.
Walt Disney wants to keep Mickey Mouse under copyright.
It doesn't appear to be a trademark suit, though that will naturally be an element, but a "look and feel" copyright suit. It's got a lot more basis that the suit on round-cornered rectangles the got so much press last year..
I don't believe you either, but the thing is, while the Nazis hadn't come to power they didn't do all that much torturing people either. They merely advocated it. Even after they came to power it took them awhile to really work things up. Things don't happen instantaneously.
So. I'm troubled that this is happening, because with IP numbers so limited it's difficult to post on the new without the support of a webhost. This is a dubious method of social control, and should be resisted. But to defend the neo-nazis is a truly appalling choice...and not because they call themselves neo-nazis, but because they preach violent racial hate. *THEY* are the ones who called themselves Nazis. Others using the same name for them (with the addition of neo-) is just accepting the label they have claimed. I could more reasonably object to many people being called Christian, as the neo-nazis at least claim many of the same doctrines as the originals did.
How many stories have you submitted to the firehose? (I'll admit, I haven't submitted any, but then I'm not the one complaining.)
That said, yeah, I think it's just you. But there sure is a lot more politics and less tech than there used to be.