Sooo...shorter code that is identical to longer code, except for length, is better? I don't think it is possible to change length and hold everything else constant. Even if you could hold everything else constant, separating code into sections that are actually longer than a more compact form can be more readable. Longer code can be easier or harder to read, easier or harder to maintain, and easier or harder to write. The only conclusion that can be made is: It depends.
From the almighty Wikipedia, "The U.S. Constitution contains no requirement that Federal judges or Supreme Court justices be members of the bar. However, there are no modern instances of the President nominating or the Congress approving any candidate who is not a member of any bar." Looks like you are right, I stand mostly corrected.
Well...if 100% of them are like this then it doesn't matter if I switch professors. If you actually went to college (which you clearly didn't, or you spent 8 years getting a bachelors) you would know that there is such a thing as schedule and wanting to graduate in less than 10 years. If you cherry pick every class AND professor you would never graduate. Poli-sci professors are supposed to expose you to different points of view, not hammer their own views into you. Yes they will have opinions and they can express them. There is a difference between expressing opinions and bludgeoning a captive audience with them.
The terms liberal and conservative are both loaded terms, most people int he US loosely think of them as synonymous with Democrat and Republican. That obviously has nothing to do with the words original/dictionary definitions. The professors I'm talking about were not moderate in any way, they were all extreme left democrats.
Well...if you went to college you would know there is some truth to it. It isn't just "liberal brainwashing" but it isn't a trivial part. Every (as in 100%) of my english, history, political science, and philosophy teachers were die hard left wing liberals. My philosophy teachers were all good at explaining positions, playing devils advocate, and not preaching which is exactly how it should be. English, history, and political science teachers frequently soap boxed and tried to hammer their views into people. There is a difference between exposing people to new viewpoints and forcing people to listen to their rants and agree with them for an A.
In the words of someone you probably love (Krugman), "Good is not the enemy of best." Competition doesn't necessarily render the best deal for the consumer and it is a bit of a roller coaster but the average result is better than a top down, misinformed, misguided, bought off approach (that's having the Fed do it, in case you didn't catch it).
If people complain enough the airport might get a different company or change policies. The airport is interested in its passengers being and feeling safe. If the company they hire doesn't do that the price they want, the airport can look elsewhere. If the Federal government mandates something, there are no options, period.
It isn't just human nature that is the problem, it is also a knowledge problem. It is not possible to know even a small fraction of what you need to know to run an economy smoothly from the top down. The emergent behavior of a capitalist system is one of its core benefits. It is self reacting and correcting when free of external interference (i.e. government regulations). It still has issues but no where near the problems of a planned economy.
Definitely disagree on the CS comment. Yes, spending huge amounts of time learning a particular language or technology in school is usually pointless. It is also true that there are CS students that are terrible programmers and self taught programmers that are amazing at what they do. However, CS students learn a myriad of general concepts that make a well rounded programmer. Non-gray hair self taughters often have large gaps in their knowledge. For example, self taughters may know nothing about threading, databases, OO Design, different strategies for testing, and jargon that helps you communicate with your fellow programmers.
I would have guessed this would have been flagged as troll but I suppose it really is quite funny in a sad way. Unless you really think decrying/proselytizing evolution was the OPs primary concern, you aren't giving very helpful advice. Either go with something to further yourself down the management track (business, economics, etc.) or add something related to computers such as CS or CPE with perhaps an emphasis on controls.
The rich actually pay most of the taxes. Yes, the middle class pays more taxes than the rich as a percentage of their income, but not as a total number of $$.
Also, they aren't "making money" on bonds because the interest rate is below inflation. If they collected the taxes directly there would be 0.0% interest which is a better deal.
You are correct on the Carbon Tax raising the cost of goods but the only way for us to really "go green" without a huge government intervention/ramming it down everyones throats is for people to be convinced it is actually a good idea. If "going green" is really important to people, they will pay extra for it. It clearly isn't that important to most people at this moment.
I almost wish agribusinesses would get fined for making ethanol, ethanol is truly laughable. It uses up valuable farm land to take 1 unit of "energy" and create 1.01 units of "energy". That 1 unit of energy that goes into making ethanol is almost always diesel, gasoline, or some other form of petroleum anyways. It is also only feasible because the corn industry is so heavily subsidized making corn damned close to free. The ethanol point aside, I actually agree that this would be a much better use of money than bailing out the banks or subsidizing oil companies. I would favor none of it but this is at least a better use than they often choose.
Visual Studio is now far and away better than Eclipse. I would say the turning point was around VS 2005. VS 2008+ is noticeably better. With Eclipse, I loved it 90 - 95% of the time and wanted to throw my computer out the window the other 5 - 10% of the time. With VS 2008+ I love it 90 - 95% of the time and get slightly irritated 5 - 10% of the time. That irritation usually comes from quirks in the WinForms designer.
It's an article published in a peer reviewed scientific journal. I thought you had to be a religious nut job to not believe/agree with/buy into a peer reviewed article published in a scientific journal. You must not believe in science.
There is nothing inherently wrong with being a Moderate but there is also nothing inherently good about being a Moderate. As with any politician, judge them based on how much they vote in alignment with your beliefs/values/morals. You should only "demand more moderates" if you agree with them. If one politician is in favor of murder and another is against murder, would you demand a moderate who is for murder in moderation? It is a silly example but it illustrates the point that moderation is not inherently good or bad.
Most studies are worthless anyways. Well, most studies involving people as the subject of study. We are overconfident in our own abilities to control, and account for, all of the variables. This is why you find so many studies in the "duh" category. If you pick a topic that is not in the "duh" category it is too easy to poke holes and say "but you didn't account for x, y, and z".
Don't forget that a good portion of Mac users got a Mac because they don't know anything about computers and they don't want to have to worry about all the icky sounding things like worms. The "don't be stupid" mantra applies to all OSes, I've been running Windows XP, Vista, and/or 7 for the last 5 years with no antivirus and I haven't had a single virus. I had antivirus before the 5 years and also didn't have problems. By the "don't be stupid" criteria Windows, Linux, and Macs are all equally as safe.
Slashdot Mirror
Sooo...shorter code that is identical to longer code, except for length, is better? I don't think it is possible to change length and hold everything else constant. Even if you could hold everything else constant, separating code into sections that are actually longer than a more compact form can be more readable. Longer code can be easier or harder to read, easier or harder to maintain, and easier or harder to write. The only conclusion that can be made is: It depends.
From the almighty Wikipedia, "The U.S. Constitution contains no requirement that Federal judges or Supreme Court justices be members of the bar. However, there are no modern instances of the President nominating or the Congress approving any candidate who is not a member of any bar." Looks like you are right, I stand mostly corrected.
A third of Sun-Like stars may have spaghetti monsters hiding in their solar systems.
How about we require judges to know something about the law? Why do lawyers need to pass the bar but judges don't?
Well...if 100% of them are like this then it doesn't matter if I switch professors. If you actually went to college (which you clearly didn't, or you spent 8 years getting a bachelors) you would know that there is such a thing as schedule and wanting to graduate in less than 10 years. If you cherry pick every class AND professor you would never graduate. Poli-sci professors are supposed to expose you to different points of view, not hammer their own views into you. Yes they will have opinions and they can express them. There is a difference between expressing opinions and bludgeoning a captive audience with them.
The terms liberal and conservative are both loaded terms, most people int he US loosely think of them as synonymous with Democrat and Republican. That obviously has nothing to do with the words original/dictionary definitions. The professors I'm talking about were not moderate in any way, they were all extreme left democrats.
No, they are protesting Corporatism. Corporatism isn't the same thing as Capitalism. There is a significant difference.
Good point, I just cancelled my subscription to Spotify.
Well...if you went to college you would know there is some truth to it. It isn't just "liberal brainwashing" but it isn't a trivial part. Every (as in 100%) of my english, history, political science, and philosophy teachers were die hard left wing liberals. My philosophy teachers were all good at explaining positions, playing devils advocate, and not preaching which is exactly how it should be. English, history, and political science teachers frequently soap boxed and tried to hammer their views into people. There is a difference between exposing people to new viewpoints and forcing people to listen to their rants and agree with them for an A.
I didn't vote for anyone who is in the federal government currently. And yes, I vote.
In the words of someone you probably love (Krugman), "Good is not the enemy of best." Competition doesn't necessarily render the best deal for the consumer and it is a bit of a roller coaster but the average result is better than a top down, misinformed, misguided, bought off approach (that's having the Fed do it, in case you didn't catch it).
Ummm, cost? Screening technology and techniques? Other stuff I'm not thinking of.
If people complain enough the airport might get a different company or change policies. The airport is interested in its passengers being and feeling safe. If the company they hire doesn't do that the price they want, the airport can look elsewhere. If the Federal government mandates something, there are no options, period.
It isn't just human nature that is the problem, it is also a knowledge problem. It is not possible to know even a small fraction of what you need to know to run an economy smoothly from the top down. The emergent behavior of a capitalist system is one of its core benefits. It is self reacting and correcting when free of external interference (i.e. government regulations). It still has issues but no where near the problems of a planned economy.
Definitely disagree on the CS comment. Yes, spending huge amounts of time learning a particular language or technology in school is usually pointless. It is also true that there are CS students that are terrible programmers and self taught programmers that are amazing at what they do. However, CS students learn a myriad of general concepts that make a well rounded programmer. Non-gray hair self taughters often have large gaps in their knowledge. For example, self taughters may know nothing about threading, databases, OO Design, different strategies for testing, and jargon that helps you communicate with your fellow programmers.
I would have guessed this would have been flagged as troll but I suppose it really is quite funny in a sad way. Unless you really think decrying/proselytizing evolution was the OPs primary concern, you aren't giving very helpful advice. Either go with something to further yourself down the management track (business, economics, etc.) or add something related to computers such as CS or CPE with perhaps an emphasis on controls.
The rich actually pay most of the taxes. Yes, the middle class pays more taxes than the rich as a percentage of their income, but not as a total number of $$. Also, they aren't "making money" on bonds because the interest rate is below inflation. If they collected the taxes directly there would be 0.0% interest which is a better deal. You are correct on the Carbon Tax raising the cost of goods but the only way for us to really "go green" without a huge government intervention/ramming it down everyones throats is for people to be convinced it is actually a good idea. If "going green" is really important to people, they will pay extra for it. It clearly isn't that important to most people at this moment.
I almost wish agribusinesses would get fined for making ethanol, ethanol is truly laughable. It uses up valuable farm land to take 1 unit of "energy" and create 1.01 units of "energy". That 1 unit of energy that goes into making ethanol is almost always diesel, gasoline, or some other form of petroleum anyways. It is also only feasible because the corn industry is so heavily subsidized making corn damned close to free. The ethanol point aside, I actually agree that this would be a much better use of money than bailing out the banks or subsidizing oil companies. I would favor none of it but this is at least a better use than they often choose.
Visual Studio is now far and away better than Eclipse. I would say the turning point was around VS 2005. VS 2008+ is noticeably better. With Eclipse, I loved it 90 - 95% of the time and wanted to throw my computer out the window the other 5 - 10% of the time. With VS 2008+ I love it 90 - 95% of the time and get slightly irritated 5 - 10% of the time. That irritation usually comes from quirks in the WinForms designer.
It's an article published in a peer reviewed scientific journal. I thought you had to be a religious nut job to not believe/agree with/buy into a peer reviewed article published in a scientific journal. You must not believe in science.
Nice ad hominem attack.
There is nothing inherently wrong with being a Moderate but there is also nothing inherently good about being a Moderate. As with any politician, judge them based on how much they vote in alignment with your beliefs/values/morals. You should only "demand more moderates" if you agree with them. If one politician is in favor of murder and another is against murder, would you demand a moderate who is for murder in moderation? It is a silly example but it illustrates the point that moderation is not inherently good or bad.
Maybe they just stopped arresting as many of them but there are just as many crimes/criminals at that age :P
Most studies are worthless anyways. Well, most studies involving people as the subject of study. We are overconfident in our own abilities to control, and account for, all of the variables. This is why you find so many studies in the "duh" category. If you pick a topic that is not in the "duh" category it is too easy to poke holes and say "but you didn't account for x, y, and z".
Don't forget that a good portion of Mac users got a Mac because they don't know anything about computers and they don't want to have to worry about all the icky sounding things like worms. The "don't be stupid" mantra applies to all OSes, I've been running Windows XP, Vista, and/or 7 for the last 5 years with no antivirus and I haven't had a single virus. I had antivirus before the 5 years and also didn't have problems. By the "don't be stupid" criteria Windows, Linux, and Macs are all equally as safe.