A map is essentially a work of art, like a drawing (well actually a drawing). An analog with maps would be claiming that your competitor couldn't got out and create their own map of an area, because your map essentially had rights over the area.
Citation for those left-wingers defending Flickr? Also interesting that you're defending this "iconic" image. It's an amazingly muddled piece of speech. The Joker is definitely a violent anarchist. Which is almost diametrically the opposite of socialism. And who the heck knows what any of this has to do with Obama. It's definitely protected speech. But it's just protecting someone's right to essentially make a bumper sticker that leaves people scratching their head.
My IM client (pidgin) underlines misspelled words in red, as does firefox, so I've found that my spelling has actually been getting better. I tend to actually learn the correct spelling over time.
Too arthouse for Slashdot. They mean best special effects movie with aliens. I personally thought Timecrimes was pretty ground breaking in it's ability to do great sci-fi for ridiculously little also.
I realize there's some bad DLC, but you're not forced to buy it. The expansion pack to Pixel Junk Monsters was definitely worth $5, and I wish I could actually sell back many of the songs that came with Rock Band, and replace them with downloaded ones. Would I have paid $500 for Rock Band so it could included all the tracks I have now? No. The DLC was a selling point.
That said, I don't see the point of buying costumes for Little Big Planet, but apparently someone does. I think it would be wise to differentiate DLC that is essentially a patch, vs. DLC that adds to the game.
I'm a playwright. I wonder if the reason my plays aren't that popular is that I don't keep the same title, and character names each time, and "re-imagine" the setting, story, and plot. I guess I'm just doing this all wrong.
I've been upfront in interviews. I work 40 hours/week. I get my work done and I don't hang out. I cook dinner every night so I don't have time to be drawn in to an issue because someone else has been procrastinating working the first 7 hours of the day.
If they have a problem with this, I don't consider them.
One big problem are the people who don't want to go home.
Supply and demand says you're wrong about "the industry stabilizing for... general programmers". But then I guess you're not into the reality of economics. The industry is stabilizing for crappy programmers. In so far as the dot com bubble has burst and we no longer need to employ people who can't write anything useful.
"After all most of the code these days is written in "very safe" languages where it is hard to shoot yourself in the foot."
Considering the code you write could have probably been done with a significantly complex adding machine, I'll let that one go as "inexperience in writing complex systems".
Because RSS feeds don't generally compress their summary down to 140 characters. I don't want to read the CDC's rss feed. I want 140 character updates on epidemics.
I feel like we're debating the merits of newspapers and magazines here. One can get the same information in both.
I also use twitter as a highly asynchronous chat client.
I'm a software developer. I monitor a lot of software, not just firefox. I don't twitter from my phone. I get updates of the number of people who have died of flu via the CDC, which is hardly an arbitrary number. And my friends tweets are more amusing than palin.
I also have a theater company and used it to let people know that a show had been cancelled due to illness.
Again, just because you don't see the usefulness doesn't mean that no one else does.
Yes, I get CDC outbreak updates, political updates, software updates. These are hardly social nonsense. If you don't "get" twitter, that's fine, but don't assume it's useless.
Twitter is like the news ticker with RSS feeds being the newspaper.
Didn't know they had any "news" sites. This sounds like a great plan though. Fox News aficionados are not exactly known for their strong minds. I'm sure they'll be more than happy to pay for their "news".
And the rest of us won't have to be bothered with links to their content anymore. Win-win all round.
Treat your wife like a human being who is your intellectual equal. Communicate your needs and desires, don't sweat the small stuff, and don't go to bed angry.
Wow. I remember windows 3.1 audio drivers constantly locking up the computer. Hey an error occurred, I was going to make an alarm noise and now you need to reboot your computer. Remember how we used to boot into DOS to play games instead of playing them through windows because otherwise your computer would lock?
I also remember constant hiccups playing mp3s on 95 and 98. I remember sound driver incompatibilities with XP and Vista. It's great it's worked flawlessly for you. But some of us abandoned windows because linux does work better for us. Windows is just the devil you know. It's a stretch to say it works flawlessly.
Damn protestant work ethic. On one hand it's great for capitalism. On the other hand you get cake mixes where you have to add eggs, because simply adding water isn't enough work.
Hi. I'm the American actor, violinist, ballet dancer, and sculptor. We have little sympathy. Welcome back to having to make art because you love it, and not because you expect it to be a lottery ticket.
No you're missing the point. Uninhabited artic wasteland is off limits because it's pristine. West Texas is not because it's already been developed. You're comparing what is essentially a large vacant lot that a building was bulldozed off of with the Grand Canyon. They're not the same at all.
As I stated earlier if you were suggesting putting wind turbines in Big Bend National Park I would be against it, because that is parkland in a somewhat pristine state. Most of west texas is not prairie. It is basically land that has been more-or-less bulldozed by cattle for generations.
And more importantly wind power is renewable. So if I'm going to make a value judgment about destroying land to get renewable energy, I'm going to favor it over destroying land to get non-renewable energy.
You're suggesting hypocrisy because you're seeing apples and apples, when you're actually comparing apples and oranges. Natural Gas may be part of a short term solution, but it has some potentially frightening downsides (water shortages, earthquakes), and doesn't solve the problem in any sort of long term way.
Yes. Just to add to this. Most of west texas has been used for cattle for decades now. All the old growth has been destroyed. The grasslands have been destroyed. And most native species have been destroyed. Cattle are far worse to the environment than wind turbines. To get it back to the state that the artic refuge is in would take many years. I'm not suggesting we put them in Big Bend.
But hey, you have no solutions, so why not condemn everyone else's!
* And just as a footnote. The Obama administration is a pretty conservative administration. Most liberals are not happy with a lot of his policies (esp. clean coal). I know that Limbaugh and Fox tell you that we all march in lockstep behind our leader, but it's simply not true. Most liberals like him for the same reason a majority of Americans like him - he comes off as a nice guy. His policies aren't that great, but when you compare them to Bush they're fantastic (although that's like comparing a community theater to an elementary school christmas program).
I think that, yes, our modern lifestyle is excessive. But this is happening with coal too. You just don't appear to live in a state where it's extracted, nor downwind of where the plants are releasing pollutants. Texas has a LOT of land that's not particularly good for animals, humans or plants over about 3 feet tall, and is perfect for wind farms.
Actually yes. Modern music is almost always collaborative. Sculpture is often done with more than one person. And modern theater is pretty much gotten to the point where you frequently have multiple collaborators (not to mention musical theater which has been paired pretty much since its inception).
I find that some people are not compatible with paired programming, but when it works it can be amazing. My old boss and I would write code for entire days without getting up once. Not particularly healthy, but ridiculously productive.
Yes, if twitter is so useless for business, then why is my business selling more tickets thanks to it? I don't know think that either twitter or facebook will be some sort of long term tool like the telephone, but it doesn't mean that as a business I can ignore it now.
Twitter is most useful for people with cars, and is not a chat application. If a teen thinks that twitter is competing with chat, he obviously doesn't get it. Maybe once he's in college and is trying to figure out where to go on any particular evening he'll "get" twitter.
And the university boards are made up of scientists? I'm not really trying to argue that University's aren't generally run by more liberal leaning people though. That was actually my point. Small 'c' conservatives are going to be less interested in learning new things or in change, so they would more than likely be less interested in University positions. I'm not saying that there won't be conservative teacher's, but I think that you're always going to find Universities leaning towards people who are more interested in learning new things which is going to always tend towards a more liberal view.
It's like coming to the shocking realization that our business managers are heavily weighted towards being conservative. It's perhaps not caused so much by politics as the temperament that fits the job.
Yeah, I'm sure that's the reason. Especially since Republicans have been in power for how long? Shouldn't they have all become Republicans so as not to bite the currently feeding hand? Or are you saying they all changed political affiliations since November?
Perhaps it's because Republicans are generally more small "c" conservative. I.e. more resistant to change and new ideas. These are not particularly good traits for being a scientist.
Slashdot Mirror
A map is essentially a work of art, like a drawing (well actually a drawing). An analog with maps would be claiming that your competitor couldn't got out and create their own map of an area, because your map essentially had rights over the area.
Citation for those left-wingers defending Flickr? Also interesting that you're defending this "iconic" image. It's an amazingly muddled piece of speech. The Joker is definitely a violent anarchist. Which is almost diametrically the opposite of socialism. And who the heck knows what any of this has to do with Obama. It's definitely protected speech. But it's just protecting someone's right to essentially make a bumper sticker that leaves people scratching their head.
My IM client (pidgin) underlines misspelled words in red, as does firefox, so I've found that my spelling has actually been getting better. I tend to actually learn the correct spelling over time.
Too arthouse for Slashdot. They mean best special effects movie with aliens. I personally thought Timecrimes was pretty ground breaking in it's ability to do great sci-fi for ridiculously little also.
I realize there's some bad DLC, but you're not forced to buy it. The expansion pack to Pixel Junk Monsters was definitely worth $5, and I wish I could actually sell back many of the songs that came with Rock Band, and replace them with downloaded ones. Would I have paid $500 for Rock Band so it could included all the tracks I have now? No. The DLC was a selling point.
That said, I don't see the point of buying costumes for Little Big Planet, but apparently someone does. I think it would be wise to differentiate DLC that is essentially a patch, vs. DLC that adds to the game.
Huh. Lots of strings attached to free money? That seems so... fair.
I'm glad they're not taking it. It just highlights again how unnecessary their tiered pricing was.
I'm a playwright. I wonder if the reason my plays aren't that popular is that I don't keep the same title, and character names each time, and "re-imagine" the setting, story, and plot. I guess I'm just doing this all wrong.
I've been upfront in interviews. I work 40 hours/week. I get my work done and I don't hang out. I cook dinner every night so I don't have time to be drawn in to an issue because someone else has been procrastinating working the first 7 hours of the day.
If they have a problem with this, I don't consider them.
One big problem are the people who don't want to go home.
"specializing quant/algo-programmer"
Supply and demand says you're wrong about "the industry stabilizing for... general programmers". But then I guess you're not into the reality of economics. The industry is stabilizing for crappy programmers. In so far as the dot com bubble has burst and we no longer need to employ people who can't write anything useful.
"After all most of the code these days is written in "very safe" languages where it is hard to shoot yourself in the foot."
Considering the code you write could have probably been done with a significantly complex adding machine, I'll let that one go as "inexperience in writing complex systems".
Because RSS feeds don't generally compress their summary down to 140 characters. I don't want to read the CDC's rss feed. I want 140 character updates on epidemics.
I feel like we're debating the merits of newspapers and magazines here. One can get the same information in both.
I also use twitter as a highly asynchronous chat client.
I'm a software developer. I monitor a lot of software, not just firefox. I don't twitter from my phone. I get updates of the number of people who have died of flu via the CDC, which is hardly an arbitrary number. And my friends tweets are more amusing than palin.
I also have a theater company and used it to let people know that a show had been cancelled due to illness.
Again, just because you don't see the usefulness doesn't mean that no one else does.
Yes, I get CDC outbreak updates, political updates, software updates. These are hardly social nonsense. If you don't "get" twitter, that's fine, but don't assume it's useless.
Twitter is like the news ticker with RSS feeds being the newspaper.
Didn't know they had any "news" sites. This sounds like a great plan though. Fox News aficionados are not exactly known for their strong minds. I'm sure they'll be more than happy to pay for their "news".
And the rest of us won't have to be bothered with links to their content anymore. Win-win all round.
Treat your wife like a human being who is your intellectual equal. Communicate your needs and desires, don't sweat the small stuff, and don't go to bed angry.
Wow. I remember windows 3.1 audio drivers constantly locking up the computer. Hey an error occurred, I was going to make an alarm noise and now you need to reboot your computer. Remember how we used to boot into DOS to play games instead of playing them through windows because otherwise your computer would lock?
I also remember constant hiccups playing mp3s on 95 and 98. I remember sound driver incompatibilities with XP and Vista. It's great it's worked flawlessly for you. But some of us abandoned windows because linux does work better for us. Windows is just the devil you know. It's a stretch to say it works flawlessly.
Damn protestant work ethic. On one hand it's great for capitalism. On the other hand you get cake mixes where you have to add eggs, because simply adding water isn't enough work.
Hi. I'm the American actor, violinist, ballet dancer, and sculptor. We have little sympathy. Welcome back to having to make art because you love it, and not because you expect it to be a lottery ticket.
That meme is so played out. Let it rest, before any remaining scraps of truth it contains are leached out.
No you're missing the point. Uninhabited artic wasteland is off limits because it's pristine. West Texas is not because it's already been developed. You're comparing what is essentially a large vacant lot that a building was bulldozed off of with the Grand Canyon. They're not the same at all.
As I stated earlier if you were suggesting putting wind turbines in Big Bend National Park I would be against it, because that is parkland in a somewhat pristine state. Most of west texas is not prairie. It is basically land that has been more-or-less bulldozed by cattle for generations.
And more importantly wind power is renewable. So if I'm going to make a value judgment about destroying land to get renewable energy, I'm going to favor it over destroying land to get non-renewable energy.
You're suggesting hypocrisy because you're seeing apples and apples, when you're actually comparing apples and oranges. Natural Gas may be part of a short term solution, but it has some potentially frightening downsides (water shortages, earthquakes), and doesn't solve the problem in any sort of long term way.
Yes. Just to add to this. Most of west texas has been used for cattle for decades now. All the old growth has been destroyed. The grasslands have been destroyed. And most native species have been destroyed. Cattle are far worse to the environment than wind turbines. To get it back to the state that the artic refuge is in would take many years. I'm not suggesting we put them in Big Bend.
But hey, you have no solutions, so why not condemn everyone else's!
* And just as a footnote. The Obama administration is a pretty conservative administration. Most liberals are not happy with a lot of his policies (esp. clean coal). I know that Limbaugh and Fox tell you that we all march in lockstep behind our leader, but it's simply not true. Most liberals like him for the same reason a majority of Americans like him - he comes off as a nice guy. His policies aren't that great, but when you compare them to Bush they're fantastic (although that's like comparing a community theater to an elementary school christmas program).
I think that, yes, our modern lifestyle is excessive. But this is happening with coal too. You just don't appear to live in a state where it's extracted, nor downwind of where the plants are releasing pollutants. Texas has a LOT of land that's not particularly good for animals, humans or plants over about 3 feet tall, and is perfect for wind farms.
Actually yes. Modern music is almost always collaborative. Sculpture is often done with more than one person. And modern theater is pretty much gotten to the point where you frequently have multiple collaborators (not to mention musical theater which has been paired pretty much since its inception).
I find that some people are not compatible with paired programming, but when it works it can be amazing. My old boss and I would write code for entire days without getting up once. Not particularly healthy, but ridiculously productive.
Yes, if twitter is so useless for business, then why is my business selling more tickets thanks to it? I don't know think that either twitter or facebook will be some sort of long term tool like the telephone, but it doesn't mean that as a business I can ignore it now.
Twitter is most useful for people with cars, and is not a chat application. If a teen thinks that twitter is competing with chat, he obviously doesn't get it. Maybe once he's in college and is trying to figure out where to go on any particular evening he'll "get" twitter.
And the university boards are made up of scientists? I'm not really trying to argue that University's aren't generally run by more liberal leaning people though. That was actually my point. Small 'c' conservatives are going to be less interested in learning new things or in change, so they would more than likely be less interested in University positions. I'm not saying that there won't be conservative teacher's, but I think that you're always going to find Universities leaning towards people who are more interested in learning new things which is going to always tend towards a more liberal view.
It's like coming to the shocking realization that our business managers are heavily weighted towards being conservative. It's perhaps not caused so much by politics as the temperament that fits the job.
Yeah, I'm sure that's the reason. Especially since Republicans have been in power for how long? Shouldn't they have all become Republicans so as not to bite the currently feeding hand? Or are you saying they all changed political affiliations since November?
Perhaps it's because Republicans are generally more small "c" conservative. I.e. more resistant to change and new ideas. These are not particularly good traits for being a scientist.