Fines don't do it. Jailtime for CEOs would. My rule of thumb- any crime bad enough to be fined a 100K dollars should include 6 months of jailtime for a CxO or the president of the board of directors. For every 100K after that, add 6 months for another of them. No parole. THAT would get companies to clean up their act.
For big dollar games like this they don't rake based on bets placed, they charge for time- basically they rent you a dealer and the table. Same end result though.
Libraries should provide functions and classes that do things, not try to add new syntax to the language. Using things that way is fragile, hard to understand, and impossible to debug. That's why people don't like using Boost or the STL, and ignore most of it except the containers and smart pointers. Things like boost lambdas are language abuse, not features. People did similar things with the preprocessor in C, and it was considered bad code then. Its bad code now.
Disagree. Using foreach with a function pointer or functor separates the body of the code from the loop implementation and greatly increases debugging time and maintentance cost. It hurts more than it helps. This isn't true for other languages like perl, Java, etc where the implementation is cleaner, but the STL foreach is garbage.
The container classes (list, map, vector, etc) in the STL are good enough to be worth using. And of course string. Going full out with functors, generic programming, etc does frequently make an unreadable mess, but no need to throw out the good parts with the bad.
Boost is sort of like CPAN for perl- its a repository of libraries you can pick and choose from. It has some really useful things in it and a lot of crap. Talking about how good/bad Boost is is pointless, from a code perspective. Talk about how well or not well it works as a repository.
Of course, that makes the linked article pointless too- programmers write libraries for a language faster than the standards committee updates it? No shit. If they didn't, we ought to be worried.
Most places along the border will happily take USD. Same for US places near Canada. Its all about the ease of them trading it again to the next person. In places in Europe its easier to use Euros even if it isn't the local currency- because they can trade it easily. Most hotels in Europe quote in euros, and take payment in euros- even in Croatia and Turkey where they use other currencies.
No, the thing holding together the US dollar is common acceptance. It has value because I can go to the store and be assured the man behind the counter will take it. We do that because it's better than a barter system, and we've all mutually agreed to use dollars. The only thing that could harm that would be a large number of people suddenly deciding not to accept it. The amount of debt the US government issues has no bearing on it, unless they decide to massively print money to pay off that debt. Nobody accepts dollars because of the amount of US debt, they accept it because they know they can trade it again.
To be fair, she would have paid the same in taxes whether it had been taken out or if she had to write a check, so its not like she wouldn't have had the same amount of money in the end either way. Although I'm sure the unexpectedness of the bill wasn't pleasant.
Consumerism and the way mass-media is done* has bred a dominant culture of intellectual and emotional babies. They're stuck at an infantile mentality and the surest sign of it is the unwillingness to take personal responsibility. A form of this personal failing is like this: "it's not good enough that *I* don't engage in an activity I disagree with - no one else should do it either!" This pathological inability to be satisfied with anything less than such options not being present at all is a complete rejection of even the slightest self-determinism. It's like these people don't even trust themselves not to watch, read, listen to, or engage in something they find distasteful.
Yup, its a completely new phenomena. Its not like there was ever a temperance movement that outlawed drinking because they decided it should be a universal value. And we avoided a civil war because everyone without slaves respected the rights of slaveholders to have them. And nobody would ever go to war over religious differences, because its obviously enough that you worship in your own way. Yup, totally new thing caused by mass media.
Now back to reality. People haven't changed. They have always wanted to enforce some of their beliefs on others, either for their belief it was better for the other, better for 3rd parties, or better for themselves. You do it yourself- your belief is that people should never do this. Why? How far should we take it- should we make murder legal and simply hope people decide "well, *I* won't murder someone"? But you're trying to enforce that belief of yours on a population that time and again has decided that the balance should be closer to the middle.
People are people. It's not a media problem, its a humanity problem. And it's a conflict that will last until the end of time.
Its not just dropping the ones that take the most work- some of us drop the ones that are least interesting. But f you're talking about the free online courses, signing up for a bunch and surveying them to see how interested you are is a good way to try things that you don't know your interest level on without high investment. Of course, I'm not taking those classes for school (and even the ones I pass would never go on my resume), I'm doing it for amusement. And I'm talking free classes.
This is a factor. There's also the quasi-dropout rate. I've decided in several courses that the amount of work to do the homework wasn't worth it, because the code was trivial. I just wanted to follow the lectures and have a discussion room, I got more out of that.
But the real dropout rate is still high. I was a TA at a distance math course in the early 2000s. In 3 years nobody ever finished it- except me. I've done MITx and Coursera, every course has dozens of people saying they didn't know it would be this much work and dropping out- and that continues throughout the first 3/4 of the courses. Figure that most of the people who drop out don't care enough to post, I would be shocked if the actual drop out rate of people who decide they just don't want to do it was below 75%. 90% sounds about right.
Actually the phone part of the deal is the part I use *least* frequently. I use it as a mobile web browser at least an order of magnitude more- I use that daily where I may have an actual call one a week or less. There's definitely a set of people out there who don't really want or use the smartphone features, but there's a lot more of us who do.
And guess what- there's plenty of dumbphones still out there. So buy one. The rest of us like having computers in our pockets.
Yes, there is a reason that the owner needs to be able to put on any hack he wants- he owns it. It's his. He has every right to install any software he wishes on that device. Even though I've never installed an android image, not allowing me to is why I would never buy an HTC phone or suggest one to either friends family or as an IT purchase.
As for updates- you're worried about security and you don't think updates are important? Wow.
Your pre-smartphone didn't do high speed data (requires more power), work as a mini-computer (power), have a high res display (power), had a processor that was a fraction of the speed (power). Its like complaining your car needs more gas than the old bicycle you used to ride. A week would be awesome, but we need major improvements in battery tech to get that. Until then, we live with what we have, and 2 days is a nice improvement over what we had a year or so ago.
Most states don't need to- a majority of electoral votes need to. And as the constitution also says states may allocate electoral votes for any reason (in fact, they don't even need to hold an election) it would be a supreme court case to decide which holds precedence. Given the supreme court's reluctance to weigh in on presidential elections, it would likely allow it, although that's never assured.
Of course they do. See Wyoming- a single person's vote in Wyoming is worth 3/563000 =5.32e-6 of an electoral vote (based on 2012 census data). A vote in California is worth 55/37200000= 1.47e-6 votes. A person in Wyoming is worth 4 times as much. That's completely unfair.
Now historically it makes sense- it dates back to right post revolution where we were really 13 nations who decided to band together into 1, and it was a compromise to get the small states to go along with it. It stopped making sense when we became a real nation beyond point of breakup- basically after the civil war it was outdated. Now, due to geography its a system that's totally unfair.
You realize that in most of those higher level languages *everything* is a pointer. So you're not actually saving yourself anything except calls to delete. Most of the difficult parts of pointers you still need to worry about.
Actually study that suggestion. He wanted to mint it so we'd technically have 1 trillion in assets and could ignore the debt ceiling. Which is an idiotic law- if you pass laws requiring us to spend the money, then say we can't spend the money legally, it makes no sense. He never suggested using it to fix the economy, but to end run around bad law. Although I do happen to disagree with that approach- it gives too much power to the presidency, I'd rather see a constitutional challenge to the debt ceiling claiming that either the 14th amendment makes it invalid or that its overriden by the bills that require us to spend money.
But the coin was never an idea to fix anything, it was a legal loophole.
So as an insult you call me a nobel prize winner? I wish everyone disagreed with me like that.
The fact is we have plenty of takers for our debt at ridiculously low rates. That means it isn't a short term problem. It may become one in the future, but for now we're perfectly fine.
Slashdot Mirror
The CxO/board at the time the crimes were committed of course. Not at the time of the ruling, that would be ex post facto.
Fines don't do it. Jailtime for CEOs would. My rule of thumb- any crime bad enough to be fined a 100K dollars should include 6 months of jailtime for a CxO or the president of the board of directors. For every 100K after that, add 6 months for another of them. No parole. THAT would get companies to clean up their act.
For big dollar games like this they don't rake based on bets placed, they charge for time- basically they rent you a dealer and the table. Same end result though.
Libraries should provide functions and classes that do things, not try to add new syntax to the language. Using things that way is fragile, hard to understand, and impossible to debug. That's why people don't like using Boost or the STL, and ignore most of it except the containers and smart pointers. Things like boost lambdas are language abuse, not features. People did similar things with the preprocessor in C, and it was considered bad code then. Its bad code now.
Still ugly as fuck. If its not built in the same style as a for, while, or do loop I'd rather see a for loop.
Disagree. Using foreach with a function pointer or functor separates the body of the code from the loop implementation and greatly increases debugging time and maintentance cost. It hurts more than it helps. This isn't true for other languages like perl, Java, etc where the implementation is cleaner, but the STL foreach is garbage.
The container classes (list, map, vector, etc) in the STL are good enough to be worth using. And of course string. Going full out with functors, generic programming, etc does frequently make an unreadable mess, but no need to throw out the good parts with the bad.
Boost is sort of like CPAN for perl- its a repository of libraries you can pick and choose from. It has some really useful things in it and a lot of crap. Talking about how good/bad Boost is is pointless, from a code perspective. Talk about how well or not well it works as a repository.
Of course, that makes the linked article pointless too- programmers write libraries for a language faster than the standards committee updates it? No shit. If they didn't, we ought to be worried.
Unfortunately the grandparent has NIH, so he had to reinvent the acronym.
Most places along the border will happily take USD. Same for US places near Canada. Its all about the ease of them trading it again to the next person. In places in Europe its easier to use Euros even if it isn't the local currency- because they can trade it easily. Most hotels in Europe quote in euros, and take payment in euros- even in Croatia and Turkey where they use other currencies.
No, the thing holding together the US dollar is common acceptance. It has value because I can go to the store and be assured the man behind the counter will take it. We do that because it's better than a barter system, and we've all mutually agreed to use dollars. The only thing that could harm that would be a large number of people suddenly deciding not to accept it. The amount of debt the US government issues has no bearing on it, unless they decide to massively print money to pay off that debt. Nobody accepts dollars because of the amount of US debt, they accept it because they know they can trade it again.
To be fair, she would have paid the same in taxes whether it had been taken out or if she had to write a check, so its not like she wouldn't have had the same amount of money in the end either way. Although I'm sure the unexpectedness of the bill wasn't pleasant.
Yup, its a completely new phenomena. Its not like there was ever a temperance movement that outlawed drinking because they decided it should be a universal value. And we avoided a civil war because everyone without slaves respected the rights of slaveholders to have them. And nobody would ever go to war over religious differences, because its obviously enough that you worship in your own way. Yup, totally new thing caused by mass media.
Now back to reality. People haven't changed. They have always wanted to enforce some of their beliefs on others, either for their belief it was better for the other, better for 3rd parties, or better for themselves. You do it yourself- your belief is that people should never do this. Why? How far should we take it- should we make murder legal and simply hope people decide "well, *I* won't murder someone"? But you're trying to enforce that belief of yours on a population that time and again has decided that the balance should be closer to the middle.
People are people. It's not a media problem, its a humanity problem. And it's a conflict that will last until the end of time.
Its not just dropping the ones that take the most work- some of us drop the ones that are least interesting. But f you're talking about the free online courses, signing up for a bunch and surveying them to see how interested you are is a good way to try things that you don't know your interest level on without high investment. Of course, I'm not taking those classes for school (and even the ones I pass would never go on my resume), I'm doing it for amusement. And I'm talking free classes.
This is a factor. There's also the quasi-dropout rate. I've decided in several courses that the amount of work to do the homework wasn't worth it, because the code was trivial. I just wanted to follow the lectures and have a discussion room, I got more out of that.
But the real dropout rate is still high. I was a TA at a distance math course in the early 2000s. In 3 years nobody ever finished it- except me. I've done MITx and Coursera, every course has dozens of people saying they didn't know it would be this much work and dropping out- and that continues throughout the first 3/4 of the courses. Figure that most of the people who drop out don't care enough to post, I would be shocked if the actual drop out rate of people who decide they just don't want to do it was below 75%. 90% sounds about right.
Actually the phone part of the deal is the part I use *least* frequently. I use it as a mobile web browser at least an order of magnitude more- I use that daily where I may have an actual call one a week or less. There's definitely a set of people out there who don't really want or use the smartphone features, but there's a lot more of us who do.
And guess what- there's plenty of dumbphones still out there. So buy one. The rest of us like having computers in our pockets.
Yes, there is a reason that the owner needs to be able to put on any hack he wants- he owns it. It's his. He has every right to install any software he wishes on that device. Even though I've never installed an android image, not allowing me to is why I would never buy an HTC phone or suggest one to either friends family or as an IT purchase.
As for updates- you're worried about security and you don't think updates are important? Wow.
Your pre-smartphone didn't do high speed data (requires more power), work as a mini-computer (power), have a high res display (power), had a processor that was a fraction of the speed (power). Its like complaining your car needs more gas than the old bicycle you used to ride. A week would be awesome, but we need major improvements in battery tech to get that. Until then, we live with what we have, and 2 days is a nice improvement over what we had a year or so ago.
Most states don't need to- a majority of electoral votes need to. And as the constitution also says states may allocate electoral votes for any reason (in fact, they don't even need to hold an election) it would be a supreme court case to decide which holds precedence. Given the supreme court's reluctance to weigh in on presidential elections, it would likely allow it, although that's never assured.
Actually there is a backdoor way to have it occur without a constitutional amendment- agreement by the states. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact
It's about halfway there.
Of course they do. See Wyoming- a single person's vote in Wyoming is worth 3/563000 =5.32e-6 of an electoral vote (based on 2012 census data). A vote in California is worth 55/37200000= 1.47e-6 votes. A person in Wyoming is worth 4 times as much. That's completely unfair.
Now historically it makes sense- it dates back to right post revolution where we were really 13 nations who decided to band together into 1, and it was a compromise to get the small states to go along with it. It stopped making sense when we became a real nation beyond point of breakup- basically after the civil war it was outdated. Now, due to geography its a system that's totally unfair.
You realize that in most of those higher level languages *everything* is a pointer. So you're not actually saving yourself anything except calls to delete. Most of the difficult parts of pointers you still need to worry about.
They use Lua for the non-performance effecting parts of games. They'd never consider using it in the graphics code, which is the bottleneck.
Actually study that suggestion. He wanted to mint it so we'd technically have 1 trillion in assets and could ignore the debt ceiling. Which is an idiotic law- if you pass laws requiring us to spend the money, then say we can't spend the money legally, it makes no sense. He never suggested using it to fix the economy, but to end run around bad law. Although I do happen to disagree with that approach- it gives too much power to the presidency, I'd rather see a constitutional challenge to the debt ceiling claiming that either the 14th amendment makes it invalid or that its overriden by the bills that require us to spend money.
But the coin was never an idea to fix anything, it was a legal loophole.
So as an insult you call me a nobel prize winner? I wish everyone disagreed with me like that.
The fact is we have plenty of takers for our debt at ridiculously low rates. That means it isn't a short term problem. It may become one in the future, but for now we're perfectly fine.