Congress needs to establish a commission of inquiry to help us identify people who don't agree with gay marriage, so they can be outed and ostracized. You know the routine: "Are you, or have you ever been, a conservative/orthodox/fundamentalist Christian, Muslim, or Jew?"
As recent Obama voters, it's not like we're huge hypocrites or anything. Please understand that the Democratic party is about democracy -- that's why we rejoice that California's popularly-voted Proposition 8 was overturned by a few activist judges. And we're about tolerance -- that's why we're trying to drive Christians, Muslims, and Jews out of public life by destroying their ability to hold jobs or participate in commerce.
Amazon should assign a junior engineer to personally be responsible to search/scrape the web for leaked keys, and privately contact the owners of those accounts. That would make for good PR.
I've watched a bunch of videos online of this vehicle. I've seen it go in a straight line. Is there any video of it driving around a curve while traveling at a decent speed?
Motorcycles lean into a turn, lowering their center of gravity and maximizing traction/grip with the road. My guess (in the absence of seeing evidence otherwise) is that they've programmed this vehicle to stay bolt upright and just slide around a lot. Maybe it would be popular with drifters in Tokyo.
That's technically true, and you could raise the same objection if you hear someone talking about an "Android ARM tablet". I think my general point still holds despite my informal usage, no?
This is actually pretty funny, because it's true. And I wonder whether an unspoken reason they're walking away from WinRT is due to the sandboxed nature of the new subsystem, that actually rewards good behavior and punishes bad behavior in terms of memory management and CPU binding. To put it bluntly, maybe FF is too bloated to live inside WinRT without a huge rewrite.
Maybe a bit of confusion, but in my opinion not so bad. Windows RT ARM tablets are so named because you can only install WinRT targeting apps on them.
If Microsoft called the devices and software layer WinTouch or something, that might have helped a little, as a lot of people have been disappointed that a "Windows" computer can't run legacy mouse/keyboard Windows apps.
The idea some people got that all existing Windows apps were supposed to be rewritten as Modern Apps is certainly wrong.
However, the idea that the WinRT / Modern App platform needs to go away in a future Windows version is also misguided. What you refer to as "Metro" fills a useful function that isn't otherwise served on Windows, which is enabling touch screen use, and it does a very nice job of that. True, there aren't many Windows tablets or touch monitors out there, but the number of them is increasing every day, and it would be stupid of Microsoft to ditch the whole WinRT effort now.
If you want to make the case that keyboard and mouse users shouldn't have to look at the Modern UI if they don't want to... why then I will heartily agree.
Whoosh. He's not talking about C# son..... We're a little older than that.
O my apparent father, as you are a well-aged and wise AC, please enlighten the rest of us. When wcrowe said "You mean C#?", what was he talking about if it was not C#?
Yah... a language that made it out the door a DECADE after Java...
Yeah, I love that C# came out a decade after Java, and they had opportunity to see what Java did badly and change it.
and yet I can still run a 20-year-old Java program unmodified without any issues on my Linux box.
That's cool.
Heck, my first applets from '95 still run!
[unnecessarily harsh]But of course nobody cares about your applets.[/unnecessarily harsh]
Try that with C#... on Windows from a decade ago, and you'll quickly see which setup has aged better.
I don't really care which has aged better in the past. I care about mainstream adoption _today_, and about which language as it exists _today_ is more powerful, expressive, maintainable, etc. If I program Java today, I won't restrict myself to the language subset from 20 years ago, and similarly I am happy to use new C# features that kick Java's behind (like async, var keyword, and embarrassingly many others).
The big missing perspective from your rant is that software engineering is a forward looking discipline, not a backward looking one.
I know. It's almost as repugnant as musing about new agricultural opportunities in Siberia or Canada due to global warming. These Things Are Not Discussed.
That's funny, but no. Actually C# (rather, the CLR and.NET in general) was the project Anders Hejlsberg got reassigned to after Microsoft's Java-based WFC debacle fell on its face. While C# may have started life as "Microsoft's ripoff of Java", it has grown apart in some really significant and awesome ways. I suspect that most people who are fluent in both languages will appreciate what I'm saying, and could name some of the many ways that C# rules and Java drools.
At risk of a "whoosh" moment, I don't think it's reasonable to assume that it's predominantly rich people who spend money on this. Maybe they're mostly middle class.
You know, I was going to write an extensive reply, but in my opinion, you are being downright silly. Some of your questions were good questions that merit further discussion, but regrettably I am going to sign off here. Cheers! Enjoyed the exchange.
You don't have a theory? So you want us to believe that anthropogenic emissions don't warm the atmosphere, but "naturally occurring" CO2 does, but you yourself cannot think of a reason why on earth this would be true?
Straw man again, I never said that anthropogenic emissions don't warm the atmosphere.
Consider me skeptical.
A healthy frame of mind to be in - I encourage it.
Is the climate subject to positive feedbacks? If so, what is the scale of these feedbacks, precisely? Justify your results with working and reference your observations.
Measurements suggest that there is a huge and growing amount of carbon in our atmosphere. And yet we haven't seen the warming suggested by the sensitivity in previous models. So a natural conclusion is that those models were wrong. Other ideas being put out are that possibly volcanoes are masking the effects, or the warmth is settling deep into the ocean. Regardless, it shouldn't be controversial to note that the atmospheric predictions have been wrong.
Maybe (shock and horror) a warming earth isn't such a bad thing.
Is a warming earth on the scale described by the IPCC a good thing or bad thing? Show us the model used, reference the results and model code, precise estimates of emigration, economic impacts and the cost of adaption (infrastructure opportunity cost, etc.) . Refere the economics paper in which your theories are published.
I don't need to model it -- I'm just looking at the actual earth. The gloom and doom scenarios from 15 and 20 years ago haven't happened. Yay?
I have never, ever seen a coherent explanation of why an ice age would be preferable to a warm earth. If carbon counteracts an ice age, how is that not a Good Thing?
Why would I care about strawmen?
That was not a straw man, because I didn't try to put any words in your mouth. Those were words in MY mouth which you are free to agree or disagree with. I hope that distinction is clear.
Fascinating. Do you think it is a product of the New World Order? Are the Illuminati or Bigfoot involved somehow?
There's no evidence that I'm being paid to post on Slashdot... but come to think of it, the lack of evidence is EXACTLY WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT!!!!!! *mind blown*
I'm sure it's a very fine Rolling Stone article. Don't have time to read it, but the bottom line is that the sky is not falling, and humans will almost certainly not be extinct in 40 years.
You dismiss the remarks made by "non-scientists" yet want us to believe you when you say you have a theory as to the mysterious mechanisms whereby anthropogenic emissions don't warm the atmosphere, but "naturally occurring" CO2 does.
I never said that, you just made that up. You are guilty of the straw man fallacy, and of (in general) being ridiculous.
Have you any sense at all of how ridiculous that is?
Well, being ridiculous seems to be a specialty of yours.
Since you are blasting me for things I didn't say, why don't I actually say a few things for you to blast:
* Maybe climate sensitivity to carbon isn't subject to the overwhelming, catastrophic feedback effects that have been predicted by doomsayers (and in fact, a mild decade or two suggests it isn't, and that doomsayer models may be flawed; read Richard Lindzen on this).
* Maybe (shock and horror) a warming earth isn't such a bad thing. As long as sea level rise is slow, we will have time to get out of the way. We might have droughts some places, but we also might have a lot more farmable land in places like Canada and Siberia.
* I have never, ever seen a coherent explanation of why an ice age would be preferable to a warm earth. If carbon counteracts an ice age, how is that not a Good Thing?
Slashdot Mirror
Congress needs to establish a commission of inquiry to help us identify people who don't agree with gay marriage, so they can be outed and ostracized. You know the routine: "Are you, or have you ever been, a conservative/orthodox/fundamentalist Christian, Muslim, or Jew?"
As we find these scumbags, we can work to deny them the right to start businesses in our cities like Rahm Emmanuel did in Chicago. Some of them are artisans: we can attempt to commission artistic works in conflict with their beliefs, and sue them into oblivion when they refuse. We can pressure them to resign from their jobs.
As recent Obama voters, it's not like we're huge hypocrites or anything. Please understand that the Democratic party is about democracy -- that's why we rejoice that California's popularly-voted Proposition 8 was overturned by a few activist judges. And we're about tolerance -- that's why we're trying to drive Christians, Muslims, and Jews out of public life by destroying their ability to hold jobs or participate in commerce.
(See also this.)
I am sure it is very important and fulfilling for him. For him it is Stuff that Matters. However, it is not News for Nerds.
With that said, a Slashdot that didn't post irrelevant junk so we could complain about it would hardly be Slashdot anymore, so there is that.
Amazon should assign a junior engineer to personally be responsible to search/scrape the web for leaked keys, and privately contact the owners of those accounts. That would make for good PR.
How about feminist studies in universities. Is that narrow enough to be useful? Good grief.
You do know that feminism isn't about hating on men or trying to mooch off society right? Evidently you don't.
Depends on which feminists you are talking about. Are you really unaware of the wide spectrum of activism that falls under the term "feminism"?
if I put my phone to sleep on Friday when I leave the office, it's dead when I come in on Monday.
Uh...
It's not just my phone, but all other members on my team too.
That's it. I'm calling the police.
I've watched a bunch of videos online of this vehicle. I've seen it go in a straight line. Is there any video of it driving around a curve while traveling at a decent speed?
Motorcycles lean into a turn, lowering their center of gravity and maximizing traction/grip with the road. My guess (in the absence of seeing evidence otherwise) is that they've programmed this vehicle to stay bolt upright and just slide around a lot. Maybe it would be popular with drifters in Tokyo.
That's technically true, and you could raise the same objection if you hear someone talking about an "Android ARM tablet". I think my general point still holds despite my informal usage, no?
This is actually pretty funny, because it's true. And I wonder whether an unspoken reason they're walking away from WinRT is due to the sandboxed nature of the new subsystem, that actually rewards good behavior and punishes bad behavior in terms of memory management and CPU binding. To put it bluntly, maybe FF is too bloated to live inside WinRT without a huge rewrite.
Maybe a bit of confusion, but in my opinion not so bad. Windows RT ARM tablets are so named because you can only install WinRT targeting apps on them.
If Microsoft called the devices and software layer WinTouch or something, that might have helped a little, as a lot of people have been disappointed that a "Windows" computer can't run legacy mouse/keyboard Windows apps.
The idea some people got that all existing Windows apps were supposed to be rewritten as Modern Apps is certainly wrong.
However, the idea that the WinRT / Modern App platform needs to go away in a future Windows version is also misguided. What you refer to as "Metro" fills a useful function that isn't otherwise served on Windows, which is enabling touch screen use, and it does a very nice job of that. True, there aren't many Windows tablets or touch monitors out there, but the number of them is increasing every day, and it would be stupid of Microsoft to ditch the whole WinRT effort now.
If you want to make the case that keyboard and mouse users shouldn't have to look at the Modern UI if they don't want to... why then I will heartily agree.
Yeah, get rid of GIMP. It has an offensive name.
Krita, on the other hand, has a logo of a voluptuous female squirrel with a highly visible... vagina???? *facepalm*
Whoosh. He's not talking about C# son..... We're a little older than that.
O my apparent father, as you are a well-aged and wise AC, please enlighten the rest of us. When wcrowe said "You mean C#?", what was he talking about if it was not C#?
Yah... a language that made it out the door a DECADE after Java...
Yeah, I love that C# came out a decade after Java, and they had opportunity to see what Java did badly and change it.
and yet I can still run a 20-year-old Java program unmodified without any issues on my Linux box.
That's cool.
Heck, my first applets from '95 still run!
[unnecessarily harsh]But of course nobody cares about your applets.[/unnecessarily harsh]
Try that with C#... on Windows from a decade ago, and you'll quickly see which setup has aged better.
I don't really care which has aged better in the past. I care about mainstream adoption _today_, and about which language as it exists _today_ is more powerful, expressive, maintainable, etc. If I program Java today, I won't restrict myself to the language subset from 20 years ago, and similarly I am happy to use new C# features that kick Java's behind (like async, var keyword, and embarrassingly many others).
The big missing perspective from your rant is that software engineering is a forward looking discipline, not a backward looking one.
I know. It's almost as repugnant as musing about new agricultural opportunities in Siberia or Canada due to global warming. These Things Are Not Discussed.
That's funny, but no. Actually C# (rather, the CLR and .NET in general) was the project Anders Hejlsberg got reassigned to after Microsoft's Java-based WFC debacle fell on its face. While C# may have started life as "Microsoft's ripoff of Java", it has grown apart in some really significant and awesome ways. I suspect that most people who are fluent in both languages will appreciate what I'm saying, and could name some of the many ways that C# rules and Java drools.
Reminds me of when Microsoft attempted to make their own (proprietary, locked in) java.
What is "purgery"? Would that be illegal destruction of evidence, by purging it?
At risk of a "whoosh" moment, I don't think it's reasonable to assume that it's predominantly rich people who spend money on this. Maybe they're mostly middle class.
You know, I was going to write an extensive reply, but in my opinion, you are being downright silly. Some of your questions were good questions that merit further discussion, but regrettably I am going to sign off here. Cheers! Enjoyed the exchange.
You don't have a theory? So you want us to believe that anthropogenic emissions don't warm the atmosphere, but "naturally occurring" CO2 does, but you yourself cannot think of a reason why on earth this would be true?
Straw man again, I never said that anthropogenic emissions don't warm the atmosphere.
Consider me skeptical.
A healthy frame of mind to be in - I encourage it.
Is the climate subject to positive feedbacks? If so, what is the scale of these feedbacks, precisely? Justify your results with working and reference your observations.
Measurements suggest that there is a huge and growing amount of carbon in our atmosphere. And yet we haven't seen the warming suggested by the sensitivity in previous models. So a natural conclusion is that those models were wrong. Other ideas being put out are that possibly volcanoes are masking the effects, or the warmth is settling deep into the ocean. Regardless, it shouldn't be controversial to note that the atmospheric predictions have been wrong.
Maybe (shock and horror) a warming earth isn't such a bad thing.
Is a warming earth on the scale described by the IPCC a good thing or bad thing? Show us the model used, reference the results and model code, precise estimates of emigration, economic impacts and the cost of adaption (infrastructure opportunity cost, etc.) . Refere the economics paper in which your theories are published.
I don't need to model it -- I'm just looking at the actual earth. The gloom and doom scenarios from 15 and 20 years ago haven't happened. Yay?
I have never, ever seen a coherent explanation of why an ice age would be preferable to a warm earth. If carbon counteracts an ice age, how is that not a Good Thing?
Why would I care about strawmen?
That was not a straw man, because I didn't try to put any words in your mouth. Those were words in MY mouth which you are free to agree or disagree with. I hope that distinction is clear.
Fascinating. Do you think it is a product of the New World Order? Are the Illuminati or Bigfoot involved somehow?
There's no evidence that I'm being paid to post on Slashdot... but come to think of it, the lack of evidence is EXACTLY WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT!!!!!! *mind blown*
I'm sure it's a very fine Rolling Stone article. Don't have time to read it, but the bottom line is that the sky is not falling, and humans will almost certainly not be extinct in 40 years.
You dismiss the remarks made by "non-scientists" yet want us to believe you when you say you have a theory as to the mysterious mechanisms whereby anthropogenic emissions don't warm the atmosphere, but "naturally occurring" CO2 does.
I never said that, you just made that up. You are guilty of the straw man fallacy, and of (in general) being ridiculous.
Have you any sense at all of how ridiculous that is?
Well, being ridiculous seems to be a specialty of yours.
Since you are blasting me for things I didn't say, why don't I actually say a few things for you to blast:
* Maybe climate sensitivity to carbon isn't subject to the overwhelming, catastrophic feedback effects that have been predicted by doomsayers (and in fact, a mild decade or two suggests it isn't, and that doomsayer models may be flawed; read Richard Lindzen on this).
* Maybe (shock and horror) a warming earth isn't such a bad thing. As long as sea level rise is slow, we will have time to get out of the way. We might have droughts some places, but we also might have a lot more farmable land in places like Canada and Siberia.
* I have never, ever seen a coherent explanation of why an ice age would be preferable to a warm earth. If carbon counteracts an ice age, how is that not a Good Thing?