This should be obvious that gamers would be mostly uninterested in tech careers. It'd be like people who watch television all wanting to go into theater, or people who like to drive going into automotive mechanics, or people who like to eat pursuing a career in culinary arts. Liking to use something is very different from wanting to be one of the people who make it work.
Yeah, it would kind of be like all concertgoers wanting to become professional musicians.
Wait, I think that I may have heard that analogy already.
you think NewEgg have the ability to put the recovery partition back?
No idea whether Newegg has the tools to do so or not -- and it really doesn't matter. To resell the computer, they need to restore the hard drive to its original state. If they can't do that themselves, then they'll have to return it to the manufacturer to do it for them. Tough luck on them; maybe they should complain to the morons that designed this misfeature of the OS in question.
If they aren't re-imaging the entire drive -- and that includes any recovery partition -- then they shouldn't be reselling the computer. If their OS vendor has done something stupid and requires them to send it back to the manufacturer to have that done, then that's what they need to do. It really doesn't matter whether the recovery partition is intact or not -- wiping and restoring the image from scratch should be the standard procedure, and so they have no reason to complain about someone changing the contents of that partition.
Under no circumstances is changing the contents of writable media equivalent to removing hardware from the machine, which the person I replied to suggested it was.
They wouldnt accept it back if it was missing the hard disk, or a memory stick, or some keys off the keyboard, so why would they accept it back if the recovery partition had been trashed?
Missing hardware really isn't the same thing as flipped bits on a disk.
You do not want to use it for low latency audio and there are a few specific pieces of hardware that do not work but most complainers either oppose its design principles or still hate it due to long memories rather than current issues.
I recently updated from debian squeeze to wheezy, and in the process it reinstalled pulseaudio. Surprise, surprise: my computer crashed frequently until I got rid of it again.
Sound on Linux has been very problematic the entire time I've been using it -- since the late '90s. It's turned into this weird tinker-toy arrangement where nothing quite works right, and debugging problems when you have them is extraordinarily painful.
Right now, the best solution I've found is to nuke all of the ALSA, pulseaudio, and other userland crap and go with OSSv4 -- it's been very stable for me over the last few years, and since it's self-contained at least solving problems doesn't take finding a needle in a haystack. The biggest downside is that (at least, AFAIK), it's not supported by mainstream distros, so if you're not comfortable recompiling your kernel and modules it's not usable.
You can create unlimited spam decoys in Gmail too, just use "youremailid+arandomstring@gmail.com"
This feature is worthless as a spam decoy strategy, as anyone can use it to find your real address. I would be amazed if spammers don't already strip off the "+whatever" from gmail addresses, and those that don't would certainly start if any appreciable number of people used it. It's got its uses, but spam prevention isn't among them.
I wonder why Google hasn't stepped up to supply actual disposable email addresses yet. It doesn't seem like a difficult feature to add, and would have a lot of value to their users.
Our entertainment is going out with people and socializing. We like that. Live music is better than listening to some stupid pop artists from your cd's. Bands at the restaurants and bars occasionally play covers of those over here, but you are a failing country that is both anti-social and has no understanding of what products are actually worth to pay for.
Ah, I see. This explains why there is so little piracy going on in Asian countries.
Even discounting the title, I can't parse the first sentence of the summary in any way that makes sense. I suspect that the summary was trying to say that they've precisely measured the age of the universe as 13.5 billion years (which isn't even right, according to the linked article).
Maybe Unknown Lamer is CmdrTaco coming back in disguise!
Or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.
Doesn't the existence of Android prove that Linux is more than a "component" of some "GNU OS"?
But I think that if you're going through all the trouble of designing a new language, you might as well fix as many problems as you can, no matter how small. Certainly compound declarations with function pointers are complex, but I think the ability to read the declaration from left to right is a major improvement over the Clockwise-Spiral Rule [c-faq.com] of C.
Don't forget - for me, it's not an improvement. After all, I already know how to read C-style declarations. Also, keep in mind that declarations of the sort that they are using for examples are exceedingly rare -- I can't ever remember wanting to declare a function that takes a function pointer as a parameter and also returns a function pointer. I'm sure that it comes up occasionally, but considering that I write C professionally and have never seen it, it's not the kind of thing that seems worth building the language syntax around.
In any case, though, the syntax weirdness is just an annoyance. If I had a strong reason to learn it, I could get past it soon enough, and I'm sure most other programmers are the same. Maybe when the tools, libraries, and documentation are more complete I'll take another look at it.
Perhaps this section of the FAQ might be useful in explaining some of those changes. Another page explaining the declaration syntax in particular can be found here.
I did read both of those pages while looking at Go. Their rationale for the declaration syntax was mostly that C-style declarations can get confusing when complex function pointers are involved. That's true, but from their examples it's obvious that compound declarations involving function pointers is confusing in Go as well -- if there's an advantage in readability for Go declarations, it's a small one, and I don't believe that it is enough to justify going against existing expectations.
They also neglected to mention that the readability problem that they mention can be sidestepped in C by using typedefs.
It's not that I think that C-style declarations are inherently better than Go-style. I just don't see that there's a big enough problem that "solving" it is worthwhile. I would be a lot more interested in Go if they had kept the C syntax intact, so that I could have spent my time learning and using the interesting language features.
I spent a little time playing around with it a few months ago. It had its good points and bad points -- enough of the latter that I didn't pursue it any further.
The syntax is obviously C-inspired, but with some changes, many of which seemed like experimentation -- doing something different just because it's different. Although I don't object to the philosophy, I'd like to see how those changes work out before investing a lot of time into them. In particular, the declaration syntax feels very strange to people who are used to C-style languages. There are also some contortions due to their desire to remove statement-ending semicolons; I wasn't convinced that the savings of not typing ';' was worth the cost.
You get a systems-level language that includes complex data structures, garbage collection, and various other nice features. The standard libraries are useful and fairly comprehensive, although I found several times that documentation, even for built-in libraries, is frequently outdated, insufficient, or nonexistent.
The problem with the Volt / Prius comparison is that it's not that simple. You've got to factor in operation costs. The Volt costs $0.90 less per mile to run on electric mode than the Prius. When the gasoline engine kicks in, the Volt costs $0.80 *more* per mile.
Where does your $0.90 per mile figure come from? The cost of gas could only account for about $0.10 per mile (even assuming that electricity is free). Maybe the Volt requires less maintenance or something, but especially given its higher price it's hard to imagine that accounts for another $0.80 per mile.
I wonder what the penalty would be for hacking your OWN car that you own in France..to disable or spoof said breathalizer?
Obviously, you didn't RTFA. The requirement is to simply carry a breathalyzer in the car with you so you can check your own blood alcohol level before you drive. The requirement isn't for the type of device that prevents you from starting your car without passing the test first.
yeah, if there's one thing this country really needs; its higher speed internet for the fundies in kansas.
let me remind you how backward kansas is. they are still 'not sure' about evolution and even modern science befuddles them.
THESE are the people you honor with very high speed networking?
(head asplodes)
I know land is cheap there and you can make sweatheat deals with the local corrupticians, but really google, why not upgrade a more progressive area of the country?
When I read things like this, it makes me think that the "progressives" are deserving of every bit of the antagonism that they get from the "conservatives."
Since when is it illegal to price your product to make as much of a profit as possible? (That's not what's generally meant by "price fixing," by the way.)
Slashdot Mirror
This should be obvious that gamers would be mostly uninterested in tech careers. It'd be like people who watch television all wanting to go into theater, or people who like to drive going into automotive mechanics, or people who like to eat pursuing a career in culinary arts. Liking to use something is very different from wanting to be one of the people who make it work.
Yeah, it would kind of be like all concertgoers wanting to become professional musicians.
Wait, I think that I may have heard that analogy already.
you think NewEgg have the ability to put the recovery partition back?
No idea whether Newegg has the tools to do so or not -- and it really doesn't matter. To resell the computer, they need to restore the hard drive to its original state. If they can't do that themselves, then they'll have to return it to the manufacturer to do it for them. Tough luck on them; maybe they should complain to the morons that designed this misfeature of the OS in question.
If they aren't re-imaging the entire drive -- and that includes any recovery partition -- then they shouldn't be reselling the computer. If their OS vendor has done something stupid and requires them to send it back to the manufacturer to have that done, then that's what they need to do. It really doesn't matter whether the recovery partition is intact or not -- wiping and restoring the image from scratch should be the standard procedure, and so they have no reason to complain about someone changing the contents of that partition.
Under no circumstances is changing the contents of writable media equivalent to removing hardware from the machine, which the person I replied to suggested it was.
Missing hardware really isn't the same thing as flipped bits on a disk.
While this particular sci-fi author probably could come up with that kind of cash, I'm willing to bet that 90% of sci-fi authors could not.
I recently updated from debian squeeze to wheezy, and in the process it reinstalled pulseaudio. Surprise, surprise: my computer crashed frequently until I got rid of it again.
Sound on Linux has been very problematic the entire time I've been using it -- since the late '90s. It's turned into this weird tinker-toy arrangement where nothing quite works right, and debugging problems when you have them is extraordinarily painful.
Right now, the best solution I've found is to nuke all of the ALSA, pulseaudio, and other userland crap and go with OSSv4 -- it's been very stable for me over the last few years, and since it's self-contained at least solving problems doesn't take finding a needle in a haystack. The biggest downside is that (at least, AFAIK), it's not supported by mainstream distros, so if you're not comfortable recompiling your kernel and modules it's not usable.
You can create unlimited spam decoys in Gmail too, just use "youremailid+arandomstring@gmail.com"
This feature is worthless as a spam decoy strategy, as anyone can use it to find your real address. I would be amazed if spammers don't already strip off the "+whatever" from gmail addresses, and those that don't would certainly start if any appreciable number of people used it. It's got its uses, but spam prevention isn't among them.
I wonder why Google hasn't stepped up to supply actual disposable email addresses yet. It doesn't seem like a difficult feature to add, and would have a lot of value to their users.
That's just because your hardware sucks. If you use the correct equipment, anyone with a discerning ear will be able to hear the difference.
Ah, I see. This explains why there is so little piracy going on in Asian countries.
Fortunately, we'll have disposable people riding in it.
Even discounting the title, I can't parse the first sentence of the summary in any way that makes sense. I suspect that the summary was trying to say that they've precisely measured the age of the universe as 13.5 billion years (which isn't even right, according to the linked article).
Maybe Unknown Lamer is CmdrTaco coming back in disguise!
Whites are not the minority.
Blacks are a minority and there is a long history or racism against them, especially in the south.
Racism is just as bad -- and inexcusable -- when a minority does it.
Doesn't the existence of Android prove that Linux is more than a "component" of some "GNU OS"?
But I think that if you're going through all the trouble of designing a new language, you might as well fix as many problems as you can, no matter how small. Certainly compound declarations with function pointers are complex, but I think the ability to read the declaration from left to right is a major improvement over the Clockwise-Spiral Rule [c-faq.com] of C.
Don't forget - for me, it's not an improvement. After all, I already know how to read C-style declarations. Also, keep in mind that declarations of the sort that they are using for examples are exceedingly rare -- I can't ever remember wanting to declare a function that takes a function pointer as a parameter and also returns a function pointer. I'm sure that it comes up occasionally, but considering that I write C professionally and have never seen it, it's not the kind of thing that seems worth building the language syntax around.
In any case, though, the syntax weirdness is just an annoyance. If I had a strong reason to learn it, I could get past it soon enough, and I'm sure most other programmers are the same. Maybe when the tools, libraries, and documentation are more complete I'll take another look at it.
Perhaps this section of the FAQ might be useful in explaining some of those changes. Another page explaining the declaration syntax in particular can be found here.
I did read both of those pages while looking at Go. Their rationale for the declaration syntax was mostly that C-style declarations can get confusing when complex function pointers are involved. That's true, but from their examples it's obvious that compound declarations involving function pointers is confusing in Go as well -- if there's an advantage in readability for Go declarations, it's a small one, and I don't believe that it is enough to justify going against existing expectations.
They also neglected to mention that the readability problem that they mention can be sidestepped in C by using typedefs.
It's not that I think that C-style declarations are inherently better than Go-style. I just don't see that there's a big enough problem that "solving" it is worthwhile. I would be a lot more interested in Go if they had kept the C syntax intact, so that I could have spent my time learning and using the interesting language features.
I spent a little time playing around with it a few months ago. It had its good points and bad points -- enough of the latter that I didn't pursue it any further.
The syntax is obviously C-inspired, but with some changes, many of which seemed like experimentation -- doing something different just because it's different. Although I don't object to the philosophy, I'd like to see how those changes work out before investing a lot of time into them. In particular, the declaration syntax feels very strange to people who are used to C-style languages. There are also some contortions due to their desire to remove statement-ending semicolons; I wasn't convinced that the savings of not typing ';' was worth the cost.
You get a systems-level language that includes complex data structures, garbage collection, and various other nice features. The standard libraries are useful and fairly comprehensive, although I found several times that documentation, even for built-in libraries, is frequently outdated, insufficient, or nonexistent.
Just when I thought that the quality level of Slashdot stories couldn't get any lower, samzenpus swoops in to prove me wrong.
I get the feeling that this story ends with "When wintertime rolls around, the gorillas simply freeze to death."
Where does your $0.90 per mile figure come from? The cost of gas could only account for about $0.10 per mile (even assuming that electricity is free). Maybe the Volt requires less maintenance or something, but especially given its higher price it's hard to imagine that accounts for another $0.80 per mile.
Obviously, you didn't RTFA. The requirement is to simply carry a breathalyzer in the car with you so you can check your own blood alcohol level before you drive. The requirement isn't for the type of device that prevents you from starting your car without passing the test first.
When I read things like this, it makes me think that the "progressives" are deserving of every bit of the antagonism that they get from the "conservatives."
Try telling that to people that live in states with no sales tax.
Also, note that prohibiting state sales taxes would probably require a constitutional amendment.
The OP wanted "an investigation for price manipulation". Which only makes sense if he thinks that their behavior is illegal.
Since when is it illegal to price your product to make as much of a profit as possible? (That's not what's generally meant by "price fixing," by the way.)
Think of it as a blast from the past. There were days when every other story on /. was a dupe.