The question is unclear and ambiguous, but the smarter test takers will figure out what they are probably asking. Somehow I don't think that was the original intent of the funders of this project.
A lot of people will be mad at me for saying this, but President Obama has gotten a free pass for lots of bad stuff because of his race. If a white Republican congressperson started a movement to impeach him for (just to pick an easy example) waging war in Libya without congressional authorization, they would be called racist faster than you can say the words "colorblind society".
But when I do it over and over again with no sign of regret or shame, that's different. That's a matter of character, and you would be right to be slow to trust me in other areas.
Silly, Obama can't run for reelection again. After cautiously, surreptitiously violating his campaign promises for the first four years, he can openly thumb his nose now. What are you going to do about it, boycott his presidential library?
While being intolerant of problems that personally affect me (as I said above), I am also as a developer sympathetic to the engineering constraints of actually shipping something that at least works for the 99% of users that it's important to support. So while a heavyweight per-cell implementation doesn't scale out to the "ZZZX,ZZZY, ZZZZ" columns and 65537th row very well, if it made the difference in allowing them to ship something at all, it may have been the right call at the time. I would expect that it is a very deep and difficult optimization problem.
That sounds good. Pretty sure, though, that this bug is not an effect of efficiency or lack thereof of their approach. I think it's just something wonky with the clipboard that is causing a synchronization wait to time out, after 30 seconds or something. The fix is probably one line of code, but finding it is evidently pretty hard since it's been a few years since I first started seeing it.
I've been there and done that TWICE. Get used to the idea that nothing you've learned to do along those lines will apply in a few years time as they change everything about the way it is done once again.
Yeah, unfortunately same here. But almost all software is like that, and one can always decide to use an old version.
There are two issues here: (1) the alleged fundamental design defects of Word, which is a case he doesn't compellingly make, and (2) the problem of him being forced by other people to use Word because publishers etc. standardize on it. Of course I won't question his experience w/r/t the second part, and complaining is a sacred and fundamental human right. But I will call him a whiner for failing to make the case on #1 sufficiently.
I strongly agree on the usefulness of Write's PDF support; and it's great that Microsoft was thereby pushed into including matching PDF support in Word.
The problem I have with OpenOffice and LibreOffice is that they have allowed some severe bugs to linger. For example, for the last few years and even today with the latest version of Calc (in either O.O. or L.O.), I get these long freezes when I do something as simple as copy a cell in a spreadsheet. And I'm talking as simple as just create a new spreadsheet, fill in a few cells, and hit Control+C to copy one cell. It's quite pathetic. Fortunately, I have a copy of Office.
This critic just comes across as whiny to me. I use Microsoft Word to typeset complex multilingual documents, and it works great for my needs. I've occasionally tried to use Scribus and some other OSS tools, and have been blocked by limitations, typically related to non-Latin text handling. Word is also very scriptable from pretty much any programming language via the ActiveX interfaces, which is how I use it.
If he has a better idea of how to set up a word processor, he didn't see fit to share his thoughts with the rest of us. But serious suggestions only, please. If the author wants Microsoft to make Word more like vi, I think then we'd really see some "loathing both understandable and contagious" from ordinary users.
When most people ask a pregnant woman about something like the age of the fetus, they ask questions like "how far along are you?" "When are you due?" They're not asking questions about the fetus, they're asking about the mother. The fetus isn't a person yet.
Maybe you and/or your spouse have never actually been pregnant. Otherwise you would know that this is nonsense. Of course people do quite often say "when is your baby due?" or "how far along is your baby?" During the pregnancy, medical professionals almost always refer to the fetus as a baby when talking to the expectant parents. And during the birth it's the same.
Glad to clear that up for you. Regardless, the name doesn't matter. A late term fetus is a small human being with the same right to life as you and me.
You seem to believe that, and yet do nothing. Either you don't believe what you're spewing, or you are a coward.
Hypotheticals are cheap. I hate the fact that gays are executed in Iran, but I'm not at the moment willing to sacrifice myself to travel over there and make a futile effort to do something about it. I applaud your statement that if you were pro-life then you would go to jail for your beliefs. But it isn't worth a whole lot, as such statements go.
You can say that fetuses aren't babies, just like your intellectual forebears said that Negros were only three fifths of a US person, and both sentences could be considered true by definition, because language is very flexible and these are just words. Sometimes society adopts particular language and defines what words mean to suit their own agenda. However, the flexibility of language doesn't change reality. When Dr. Gosnell snipped the necks of those tiny little people (who happened to be black) and threw them in the trash, that was not OK. And when 19th century America denied civil rights to blacks of all ages, that was not OK either. It's easy to claim with postmodernists that morality is relative, but sometimes the gross immorality of our society is encroaching and gaping at us in a way that's really hard to ignore.
If you hire experienced, competent programmers, they will be able to solve this issue for you. First they will suggest using version control (it seems frighteningly likely from your writeup that you're not currently using it). Probably git, but there are other good ones.
At that point the problem will become redefined. What you want is a script that:
- Iterates through the local working directory.
- Finds project folders that are NOT being worked on, and are also currently clean (no uncommitted files), and deletes them.
- Finds projects that need to be there and aren't, and git-clones them.
A competent programmer can write a script like this. And beyond that, for many reasons it should be the programmer's responsibility to commit stuff day to day. Also you may want to switch to a text file documentation format to eliminate merge conflicts in binary files (Word, Excel). Maybe you wanted a different answer, but I'd like to think that you're on the wrong site for that.
People like the bigot I referred to had no problem with these policies when they were being enacted by a white President primarily against Muslims
Really? "People like the bigot I referred to"? How about you find that sentiment (approval of pre-Obama civil rights violations) in their actual post, instead of just making it up and lumping them in with people you don't like. Maybe you are the real bigot here?
but now that the policies are being enacted by a black President on a more equal basis, suddenly it goes too far.
I didn't read it that way. The AC didn't give any indication that they wanted oppression of "the black man" to continue. They just complained about it being expanded to everyone. A little logic and rationality here, dude.
I read it, and don't see anything distinctly racist. Note that just because something mentions race doesn't mean it's racist, and just because you disagree with something doesn't mean it's racist.
With those handy guidelines in mind, let's look at the "racial" comment being responded to. It was a complaint that Obama has expanded oppression from "the black man" to "everyone". I'm not really sure what the commenter was referring to, but this isn't a racist comment by itself. If they said they _wanted_ "the black man" to be oppressed, that would be racist, but they didn't say that. If anything, a fair reading would bear the interpretation that that Obama should have reduced oppression of "the black man" instead of expanding oppression to everyone. Again, the commenter may be wrong, but that doesn't make the commenter racist.
I'm sorry, but this is bullshit. Where were you racist idiots when these programs were being started by President Bush? Seems to me that it was only when we got a black President that suddenly these things became a problem.
Please cut out the ridiculous accusations of racism. Whether you noticed or not, there has been a fairly sustained clamor about the Patriot Act, beginning with that ill-conceived law's passage. The clamor is louder during the current administration because (thanks to Snowden) we know more about the abuses now.
There's an unfortunate pattern of responding to any criticism of President Obama with "racist! racist!" whether there's any evidence of racism or not. There are plenty of valid criticisms of Obama and his administration, several of them potentially impeachable offenses (yes, including starting an unauthorized war). But getting back on subject, since there isn't any racism evident in the comment to which you were responding, I'd thank you kindly if you would just shut your big mouth.
The browser HAS to be able to use this password if you want it to autofill, so they might as well let US, the users, see them as well.
The convenience of autofill and having the ability to have your browser tell you the password are two separate concerns, and I don't see your logic here. For most users, locking 99% of casual guests out of viewing their passwords in plaintext is both desirable, and a common assumption about how this works. Hence the fact that this is news to a lot of people.
Slashdot Mirror
The question is unclear and ambiguous, but the smarter test takers will figure out what they are probably asking. Somehow I don't think that was the original intent of the funders of this project.
A lot of people will be mad at me for saying this, but President Obama has gotten a free pass for lots of bad stuff because of his race. If a white Republican congressperson started a movement to impeach him for (just to pick an easy example) waging war in Libya without congressional authorization, they would be called racist faster than you can say the words "colorblind society".
But when I do it over and over again with no sign of regret or shame, that's different. That's a matter of character, and you would be right to be slow to trust me in other areas.
Silly, Obama can't run for reelection again. After cautiously, surreptitiously violating his campaign promises for the first four years, he can openly thumb his nose now. What are you going to do about it, boycott his presidential library?
Users (third person plural) will be able to watch your (second person) favorite movies. Does that sound creepy to anyone else?
"Do you want me to send you back to where you WERE? UNEMPLOOOOOYED IN GREEEEENLAND???!!!"
Why don't you just write a source code generation script to write that section of logic?
While being intolerant of problems that personally affect me (as I said above), I am also as a developer sympathetic to the engineering constraints of actually shipping something that at least works for the 99% of users that it's important to support. So while a heavyweight per-cell implementation doesn't scale out to the "ZZZX,ZZZY, ZZZZ" columns and 65537th row very well, if it made the difference in allowing them to ship something at all, it may have been the right call at the time. I would expect that it is a very deep and difficult optimization problem.
That sounds good. Pretty sure, though, that this bug is not an effect of efficiency or lack thereof of their approach. I think it's just something wonky with the clipboard that is causing a synchronization wait to time out, after 30 seconds or something. The fix is probably one line of code, but finding it is evidently pretty hard since it's been a few years since I first started seeing it.
I've been there and done that TWICE. Get used to the idea that nothing you've learned to do along those lines will apply in a few years time as they change everything about the way it is done once again.
Yeah, unfortunately same here. But almost all software is like that, and one can always decide to use an old version.
There are two issues here: (1) the alleged fundamental design defects of Word, which is a case he doesn't compellingly make, and (2) the problem of him being forced by other people to use Word because publishers etc. standardize on it. Of course I won't question his experience w/r/t the second part, and complaining is a sacred and fundamental human right. But I will call him a whiner for failing to make the case on #1 sufficiently.
This critic just comes across as whiny to me.
Congratulations. You've just described 90% of what gets submitted to Slashdot.
You're right. And the other problem on Slashdot is people (like us, of course) who whine about people who whine on Slashdot.
I strongly agree on the usefulness of Write's PDF support; and it's great that Microsoft was thereby pushed into including matching PDF support in Word.
The problem I have with OpenOffice and LibreOffice is that they have allowed some severe bugs to linger. For example, for the last few years and even today with the latest version of Calc (in either O.O. or L.O.), I get these long freezes when I do something as simple as copy a cell in a spreadsheet. And I'm talking as simple as just create a new spreadsheet, fill in a few cells, and hit Control+C to copy one cell. It's quite pathetic. Fortunately, I have a copy of Office.
This critic just comes across as whiny to me. I use Microsoft Word to typeset complex multilingual documents, and it works great for my needs. I've occasionally tried to use Scribus and some other OSS tools, and have been blocked by limitations, typically related to non-Latin text handling. Word is also very scriptable from pretty much any programming language via the ActiveX interfaces, which is how I use it.
If he has a better idea of how to set up a word processor, he didn't see fit to share his thoughts with the rest of us. But serious suggestions only, please. If the author wants Microsoft to make Word more like vi, I think then we'd really see some "loathing both understandable and contagious" from ordinary users.
Why are you being so calm, rational, and informative in this debate? ;) Cheers.
When most people ask a pregnant woman about something like the age of the fetus, they ask questions like "how far along are you?" "When are you due?" They're not asking questions about the fetus, they're asking about the mother. The fetus isn't a person yet.
Maybe you and/or your spouse have never actually been pregnant. Otherwise you would know that this is nonsense. Of course people do quite often say "when is your baby due?" or "how far along is your baby?" During the pregnancy, medical professionals almost always refer to the fetus as a baby when talking to the expectant parents. And during the birth it's the same.
Glad to clear that up for you. Regardless, the name doesn't matter. A late term fetus is a small human being with the same right to life as you and me.
You seem to believe that, and yet do nothing. Either you don't believe what you're spewing, or you are a coward.
Hypotheticals are cheap. I hate the fact that gays are executed in Iran, but I'm not at the moment willing to sacrifice myself to travel over there and make a futile effort to do something about it. I applaud your statement that if you were pro-life then you would go to jail for your beliefs. But it isn't worth a whole lot, as such statements go.
You can say that fetuses aren't babies, just like your intellectual forebears said that Negros were only three fifths of a US person, and both sentences could be considered true by definition, because language is very flexible and these are just words. Sometimes society adopts particular language and defines what words mean to suit their own agenda. However, the flexibility of language doesn't change reality. When Dr. Gosnell snipped the necks of those tiny little people (who happened to be black) and threw them in the trash, that was not OK. And when 19th century America denied civil rights to blacks of all ages, that was not OK either. It's easy to claim with postmodernists that morality is relative, but sometimes the gross immorality of our society is encroaching and gaping at us in a way that's really hard to ignore.
Is it Muslims that enacted abortion laws that require medical rape with a sonar to make women feel more guilty for doing it?
You don't have the same unrestricted right to kill babies everywhere in the USA, if that's what you're asking. That is what you're asking, right?
What about Dr.[th] Vladan?
That's funny, given that the current Democrat administration seems to be aiming for about half a dozen.
If you hire experienced, competent programmers, they will be able to solve this issue for you. First they will suggest using version control (it seems frighteningly likely from your writeup that you're not currently using it). Probably git, but there are other good ones.
At that point the problem will become redefined. What you want is a script that:
- Iterates through the local working directory.
- Finds project folders that are NOT being worked on, and are also currently clean (no uncommitted files), and deletes them.
- Finds projects that need to be there and aren't, and git-clones them.
A competent programmer can write a script like this. And beyond that, for many reasons it should be the programmer's responsibility to commit stuff day to day. Also you may want to switch to a text file documentation format to eliminate merge conflicts in binary files (Word, Excel). Maybe you wanted a different answer, but I'd like to think that you're on the wrong site for that.
People like the bigot I referred to had no problem with these policies when they were being enacted by a white President primarily against Muslims
Really? "People like the bigot I referred to"? How about you find that sentiment (approval of pre-Obama civil rights violations) in their actual post, instead of just making it up and lumping them in with people you don't like. Maybe you are the real bigot here?
but now that the policies are being enacted by a black President on a more equal basis, suddenly it goes too far.
I didn't read it that way. The AC didn't give any indication that they wanted oppression of "the black man" to continue. They just complained about it being expanded to everyone. A little logic and rationality here, dude.
I read it, and don't see anything distinctly racist. Note that just because something mentions race doesn't mean it's racist, and just because you disagree with something doesn't mean it's racist.
With those handy guidelines in mind, let's look at the "racial" comment being responded to. It was a complaint that Obama has expanded oppression from "the black man" to "everyone". I'm not really sure what the commenter was referring to, but this isn't a racist comment by itself. If they said they _wanted_ "the black man" to be oppressed, that would be racist, but they didn't say that. If anything, a fair reading would bear the interpretation that that Obama should have reduced oppression of "the black man" instead of expanding oppression to everyone. Again, the commenter may be wrong, but that doesn't make the commenter racist.
Have we belabored this long enough yet?
I'm sorry, but this is bullshit. Where were you racist idiots when these programs were being started by President Bush? Seems to me that it was only when we got a black President that suddenly these things became a problem.
Please cut out the ridiculous accusations of racism. Whether you noticed or not, there has been a fairly sustained clamor about the Patriot Act, beginning with that ill-conceived law's passage. The clamor is louder during the current administration because (thanks to Snowden) we know more about the abuses now.
There's an unfortunate pattern of responding to any criticism of President Obama with "racist! racist!" whether there's any evidence of racism or not. There are plenty of valid criticisms of Obama and his administration, several of them potentially impeachable offenses (yes, including starting an unauthorized war). But getting back on subject, since there isn't any racism evident in the comment to which you were responding, I'd thank you kindly if you would just shut your big mouth.
The browser HAS to be able to use this password if you want it to autofill, so they might as well let US, the users, see them as well.
The convenience of autofill and having the ability to have your browser tell you the password are two separate concerns, and I don't see your logic here. For most users, locking 99% of casual guests out of viewing their passwords in plaintext is both desirable, and a common assumption about how this works. Hence the fact that this is news to a lot of people.