Do you honestly believe that? Why doesn't one of the smarter VPs overthrow the dumber CEO then? Because they don't want to make the big bucks, or because they remember that great game of golf they played together?
The safest jobs are the arts and services where you want a human element such as wait staff at a restaurant or a home decorator or a prostitute. These are services where the humanity is important and even if a robot could do a "better" job if you didn't know it was a robot, people will want to know that it is a real person.
Ever been to vegas? Ever seen six or more black come up in a row at a roulette table? The odds are even lower for that to happen but I see it all the time.
"But, but, but roulette wheels are spinning all the time and there are multiple tables! You'll see it way more often!"
True, as opposed to coin tosses which only existed here, right? It's not that rare of an event, just shitty luck for Bernie.
The interval in time doesn't matter in terms of how unlikely it is to happen. One in sixty four times is the fundamental measurement here. Using that to determine the length of time on average it happens isn't useful or relevant. Especially considering that it's more likely to have happened at least once than not happen at all after 43 attempts. Basically the smart money is to bet that it will happen again within 172 years not your 250. And if we're going to make all the assumptions you made, our country is over 172 years old so this seems like we were due to me.
They have two links to the backbone. The agreement you sign for that type of a hookup is not going to be the same as consumer internet access agreements. They are pretty explicitly creating an ISP. Every ISP is hooked up somewhere to the backbone as well, so you can't say "oh they hooked up to the backbone therefore they aren't allowed to provide internet services". That doesn't follow at all. The novelty of this is the network. They are installing wireless routers to create a mesh network that will facilitate communication inside the network and everything else goes in and out of the backbone hookup. This is different from the physical infrastructure required by running cables and setting up towers because presumably they are in unregulated EM spectrum with small devices for the regular nodes. It's easy for them to expand the network cheaply and don't have issues with getting approval from the municipal government.
You can't possibly believe that. Do you have an application on your computer for every website? Why not? Don't your arguments hold up there as well? Web apps designed for mobile can be just as good as native in almost every situation, sometimes better. My vision isn't so hot so I like to zoom and stuff. Some web apps don't let you do that, but I don't know of any mobile apps that allow that.
With the ability to use local storage and manifests for storing web content locally like it's an "app" that updates itself when it opens if it can. You can access everything even when you aren't connected to the network if that's your use case in this situation. Web apps can open the camera and interact with it, you can use GPS, you can do pretty much everything except looking at your phone's data which I don't want them doing anyway and they could get similar information from Facebook or Google if I wanted them to do so.
You want it to look native? Device recognition will work for that. The myth that native always is better isn't true. Can it be better? Sure. Will it be? Probably not because it takes more effort as a developer, new versions of the app have a longer deployment time because of the application store, and the audience will be smaller as well so there is less incentive for a company to pour resources in to the app. Plus you have to develop 2 different versions of the app or ignore half the possible users.
In summary, the slight edge native has on capabilities lives in a small space that most "apps" (native or web) won't use, and making the thing work as well natively as it does in the browser is harder, so most developers or teams won't get that far let alone going beyond the web experience. Finally, maintenance and agility are a pain in the ass so a native user will always have to wait longer for there usually inferior experience.
What are you talking about? You can image a VM with a bunch of different versions of linux, and once it is up and running you can do anything you want to it like any other machine. As far as rebooting at any time, that's true... sort of. It reboots when they update the host environment or when the host environment has a problem and the VM is migrated to a new host. EC2 is the same way though, so I'm not sure what your point is. The point of the cloud is that they manage those things for you and you just allocate enough VMs in different availability sets and write a product that can withstand a reboot and your clients should be retrying in the event of a transient issue like the server they were actively talking to went down. That's just enterprise software basics man, you just had to manage it yourself before.
Why on Earth would your refrigerator have to be online to keep track of food expiration dates? Can't you use a tablet, phone or PC to keep track of that?
I think you're missing the point. The point is that Spotify is bringing in more money for their supplier and the supplier is not not paying their employees (the artists) more for it. The implication is that the supplier sucks, not Spotify because it is widely believed that record companies screw their artists already. This is just another example of that.
Yeah, but you might care more about how much The Mowgli's make because they aren't a huge established star and you want them to be able to keep making music you like.
I think a better question is why are you searching for an address, getting the wrong address, and calling that a desirable feature? The reason you would search for an address is because you have been given the address, or vaguely remember it. In either case it isn't obvious that you want the software to guess at what you meant and possibly fool you in to going to the wrong place.
The point is that the CPU and the motherboard are all manufactured in such a way that the processor can work at a clock cycle so damn fast. That is precision. Not everything is about work/time. To your analogy, it's more like saying "We can have the engine do ten bazillion RPM! That's a quality engine! However, if you try to drive at that RPM, any flaw in the system can cause a huge amount of damage, so don't expect to drive it at that speed."
IP addresses and DNS servers are not the internet. It's the network. And you can build your network any way you like and avoid sending traffic through the US.
My point is that it seems to me that if you are doing something with it that you couldn't do to any type, you shouldn't be using an anonymous type. I would genuinely like to know what a valid case is for using an anonymous type where later you will be accessing one of its properties by name. If you pass that anonymous type to another function it will have to be an [object] anyway, and if its just the same function, build the properties for the anonymous type before initializing the anonymous type. You can't pass an anonymous type to another function as its type (and it would be stupid if you could), and you can't cast from an object to the anonymous type (which would lead to the errors you mentioned above). So, within the same function, your anonymous type may as well be an object instead of a var.
Why would you be using an anonymous type if you needed a reference to it that couldn't be handled with the [object] type? That sounds down-right wonky.
Uh, you put the cursor on the type name, press ctrl+r+r and type the new name. Or you click the tickle and choose the rename option after you change the name. Are you just assuming that everybody uses var everywhere?
Slashdot Mirror
Do you honestly believe that? Why doesn't one of the smarter VPs overthrow the dumber CEO then? Because they don't want to make the big bucks, or because they remember that great game of golf they played together?
The safest jobs are the arts and services where you want a human element such as wait staff at a restaurant or a home decorator or a prostitute. These are services where the humanity is important and even if a robot could do a "better" job if you didn't know it was a robot, people will want to know that it is a real person.
You don't know many pimps, do you?
Ever been to vegas? Ever seen six or more black come up in a row at a roulette table? The odds are even lower for that to happen but I see it all the time.
"But, but, but roulette wheels are spinning all the time and there are multiple tables! You'll see it way more often!"
True, as opposed to coin tosses which only existed here, right? It's not that rare of an event, just shitty luck for Bernie.
The interval in time doesn't matter in terms of how unlikely it is to happen. One in sixty four times is the fundamental measurement here. Using that to determine the length of time on average it happens isn't useful or relevant. Especially considering that it's more likely to have happened at least once than not happen at all after 43 attempts. Basically the smart money is to bet that it will happen again within 172 years not your 250. And if we're going to make all the assumptions you made, our country is over 172 years old so this seems like we were due to me.
They have two links to the backbone. The agreement you sign for that type of a hookup is not going to be the same as consumer internet access agreements. They are pretty explicitly creating an ISP. Every ISP is hooked up somewhere to the backbone as well, so you can't say "oh they hooked up to the backbone therefore they aren't allowed to provide internet services". That doesn't follow at all. The novelty of this is the network. They are installing wireless routers to create a mesh network that will facilitate communication inside the network and everything else goes in and out of the backbone hookup. This is different from the physical infrastructure required by running cables and setting up towers because presumably they are in unregulated EM spectrum with small devices for the regular nodes. It's easy for them to expand the network cheaply and don't have issues with getting approval from the municipal government.
You can't possibly believe that. Do you have an application on your computer for every website? Why not? Don't your arguments hold up there as well? Web apps designed for mobile can be just as good as native in almost every situation, sometimes better. My vision isn't so hot so I like to zoom and stuff. Some web apps don't let you do that, but I don't know of any mobile apps that allow that. With the ability to use local storage and manifests for storing web content locally like it's an "app" that updates itself when it opens if it can. You can access everything even when you aren't connected to the network if that's your use case in this situation. Web apps can open the camera and interact with it, you can use GPS, you can do pretty much everything except looking at your phone's data which I don't want them doing anyway and they could get similar information from Facebook or Google if I wanted them to do so. You want it to look native? Device recognition will work for that. The myth that native always is better isn't true. Can it be better? Sure. Will it be? Probably not because it takes more effort as a developer, new versions of the app have a longer deployment time because of the application store, and the audience will be smaller as well so there is less incentive for a company to pour resources in to the app. Plus you have to develop 2 different versions of the app or ignore half the possible users. In summary, the slight edge native has on capabilities lives in a small space that most "apps" (native or web) won't use, and making the thing work as well natively as it does in the browser is harder, so most developers or teams won't get that far let alone going beyond the web experience. Finally, maintenance and agility are a pain in the ass so a native user will always have to wait longer for there usually inferior experience.
What are you talking about? You can image a VM with a bunch of different versions of linux, and once it is up and running you can do anything you want to it like any other machine. As far as rebooting at any time, that's true... sort of. It reboots when they update the host environment or when the host environment has a problem and the VM is migrated to a new host. EC2 is the same way though, so I'm not sure what your point is. The point of the cloud is that they manage those things for you and you just allocate enough VMs in different availability sets and write a product that can withstand a reboot and your clients should be retrying in the event of a transient issue like the server they were actively talking to went down. That's just enterprise software basics man, you just had to manage it yourself before.
Why on Earth would your refrigerator have to be online to keep track of food expiration dates? Can't you use a tablet, phone or PC to keep track of that?
I think you're missing the point. The point is that Spotify is bringing in more money for their supplier and the supplier is not not paying their employees (the artists) more for it. The implication is that the supplier sucks, not Spotify because it is widely believed that record companies screw their artists already. This is just another example of that.
Yeah, but you might care more about how much The Mowgli's make because they aren't a huge established star and you want them to be able to keep making music you like.
Uhhhh, most music services show how many times a song has been played to the users, how do you think they don't show that to record companies?
I think a better question is why are you searching for an address, getting the wrong address, and calling that a desirable feature? The reason you would search for an address is because you have been given the address, or vaguely remember it. In either case it isn't obvious that you want the software to guess at what you meant and possibly fool you in to going to the wrong place.
Does it always take you 80 hours to rollback a change set?
The point is that the CPU and the motherboard are all manufactured in such a way that the processor can work at a clock cycle so damn fast. That is precision. Not everything is about work/time. To your analogy, it's more like saying "We can have the engine do ten bazillion RPM! That's a quality engine! However, if you try to drive at that RPM, any flaw in the system can cause a huge amount of damage, so don't expect to drive it at that speed."
No you aren't the only one. That's the way I feel about making computers too. "Why couldn't the government design the iPad?"
IP addresses and DNS servers are not the internet. It's the network. And you can build your network any way you like and avoid sending traffic through the US.
In what language is + a unary operator?
I disagree, as there are an infinite number of shades we would describe as green.
Um, what exactly do you think happened in Speaker for the Dead if not Ender speaking for the dead Marcao?
My point is that it seems to me that if you are doing something with it that you couldn't do to any type, you shouldn't be using an anonymous type. I would genuinely like to know what a valid case is for using an anonymous type where later you will be accessing one of its properties by name. If you pass that anonymous type to another function it will have to be an [object] anyway, and if its just the same function, build the properties for the anonymous type before initializing the anonymous type. You can't pass an anonymous type to another function as its type (and it would be stupid if you could), and you can't cast from an object to the anonymous type (which would lead to the errors you mentioned above). So, within the same function, your anonymous type may as well be an object instead of a var.
Well, in my defense the GP to my comment was referring to var in C#, so I responded with how I would handle a situation of renaming the type in C#.
Why would you be using an anonymous type if you needed a reference to it that couldn't be handled with the [object] type? That sounds down-right wonky.
Uh, you put the cursor on the type name, press ctrl+r+r and type the new name. Or you click the tickle and choose the rename option after you change the name. Are you just assuming that everybody uses var everywhere?
"XML sucks"
Really? You think so? You have any more complaints from 5 years ago? Use JSON or binary serialization, then stop complaining.