But it's best to avoid the politically motivated term 'open source' altogether and just say free software.
"Free software" is a much more "political" term than "open source". "Open source" is a technical term; "free software" brings in ideology and other crap.
Well you need to look at the percentage of those 1.5M that actually vote. In most areas, only a small percentage of people vote. That combined with the fact that a lot of votes are relatively close with the winner winning by just a small percentage of the vote, it conceiveable that 20,000 is a big enough number to sway most if not all of the votes.
Right, if by "small percentage of people" you mean "more than 50% of the population", and by "a lot of votes are relatively close" you mean "a really really tiny proportion of elections are close", and by "sway most if not all of the votes" you actually mean "sway a very few elections under special circumstances".
Not to mention that when and if all of these carpetbaggers move in, outraged residents will realize that their vote is more important than it was. A movement of 20,000 would be completely negated by only an additional 1.3% of that 1.5 million turning out against them.
The only achievement will be that the libertarians may get 2% of the vote instead of <1%.
A *REAL* coder would have noticed that q.bottom - 1 would either be out of bounds or be one up from the bottom.
Oh well, bad jokes deserve bad code I guess.
A *REAL* <blah blah blah> would have noticed that the original article mentions that the SearchKing press release is ranked 2 out of 10. Yes, 2 is "one up from the bottom".
Just like an egotistical ivory-tower half-blind code monkey to start pointing out bugs without reading the spec.
It doesn't seem right that entertainers get paids millions while the people (like engineers, etc.) who really work for their living every day (and studied their asses off) get paid peanuts.
The "regular people" are replaceable. The entertainers are not.
Take a strong glass tube with one open end, about 12" long and 1/4" inside diameter. Place a small piece of cotton ball in the tube. Press a plunger with a 1/4" rubber stopper on the end into the tube, hard. When the air pressure gets high enough, enough heat is generated to spontaneously combust the cotton with a small flash (think diesel engine).
Also, if you put a marshmallow (or preferably one of those marshmallow easter bunnies) in the jar, it will swell to many times its original size as the atmosphere is removed and the trapped air in the marshmallow expands. Let the air return and it immediately shrinks back.
Unbelievable. Any inkling of motion towards buying a TiVo I had is now gone.
"Lifetime subscription" to a particular piece of hardware that has a [useful] life of only a few years? This is like getting a "lifetime guarantee" on a 2002 desk calendar.
It was interesting as it showed the Internet both failing at and succeeding in its primary designed function, as a communications and information network that could survive a major catastrophe.
The "major catastrophe" it is designed to survive is something that physically destroys or isolates many nodes of the network. This was a simple traffic spike.
Um, artists? They're not all Jackson Pollock, you know.
When you discover a great new way to solarize a print in the darkroom, you're saying that the one time you did it randomly was just "it", to be appreciated as such, and that there's no value in being able to do that trick again? Even if it was on a 4x6 test print of your cat?
Many people will reprint and rework a particular photo over and over again until it's exactly right. Photoshop makes that a lot easier and cheaper.
* artistic manipulation. Photoshop does not count.
Why not?! Digital beats analog on the "artistic manipulation" front by miles and miles, specifically because of Photoshop. What other kind of "artistic manipulation" would you allow, other than software? We are talking about a digital medium here.
Yes, it's true you can do many analog darkroom tricks with chemicals and cardboard circles. But Photoshop does all of those, and many many more, more quickly, more easily, more repeatably and flexibly and cheaply and undo-ably . . . There are some legitimate reasons to argue analog over digital, but image manipulation is not one of them.
I'm not sure how much you know about insurance, but your rate is all based on statistics of accidents. People who get more tickets cause more accidents, period. This is not some sort of conspiracy of the insurance company to steal money from you.
It's just like the fact that your insurance is higher because you're (presumably) male and (presumably) young. There is a correlation.
If you don't like your insurance policy, you should change companies. If you think speed limits are too low, you should lobby your local politicians about it. Your method has you bringing a fraudulent case, lying to the court, and costing taxpayers money by tying up the court with this bullshit. Just be a man and own up to your actions.
Right . . . so, you're arguing that it's OK, even imperative, to use a loophole to take advantage of the system when you can. And that the line is to be drawn at "something completely outrageous", as defined by you I suppose . ..
Just because you can get away with something doesn't make it OK. I hear shoplifting is pretty easy.
The point, then, is that you can afford a lawyer, and should hire one. Sure, it's more expensive than representing yourself, but it's cheaper than paying the insurance increase, and there's a nearly-100% chance the lawyer will win your case . ..
Slashdot Mirror
haha . . . I think about that show every time I play pool nowadays. Those "three-cushion billiards" guys were unbelievable.
Hear, hear. I normally have to read those atrocities of the written word at least three times to make any sense of them. ZING!
"Free software" is a much more "political" term than "open source". "Open source" is a technical term; "free software" brings in ideology and other crap.
And ban the ~252 other potential hosts on that network?
Too...many...cliched...sayings...can't...compute ...BOOOMM!!
Right, if by "small percentage of people" you mean "more than 50% of the population", and by "a lot of votes are relatively close" you mean "a really really tiny proportion of elections are close", and by "sway most if not all of the votes" you actually mean "sway a very few elections under special circumstances".
Not to mention that when and if all of these carpetbaggers move in, outraged residents will realize that their vote is more important than it was. A movement of 20,000 would be completely negated by only an additional 1.3% of that 1.5 million turning out against them.
The only achievement will be that the libertarians may get 2% of the vote instead of <1%.
A *REAL* <blah blah blah> would have noticed that the original article mentions that the SearchKing press release is ranked 2 out of 10. Yes, 2 is "one up from the bottom".
Just like an egotistical ivory-tower half-blind code monkey to start pointing out bugs without reading the spec.
The "regular people" are replaceable. The entertainers are not.
Not right now. But all it takes is one significant event to create enough temporary hysteria to pass anything through Congress.
Yeah, if what you want is pure text, with no serious formatting, images, or mouse support. Oh wait, that's not what the guy wanted at all!
I'd like to chat with some lemurs.
How about one of these?
Take a strong glass tube with one open end, about 12" long and 1/4" inside diameter. Place a small piece of cotton ball in the tube. Press a plunger with a 1/4" rubber stopper on the end into the tube, hard. When the air pressure gets high enough, enough heat is generated to spontaneously combust the cotton with a small flash (think diesel engine).
Also, if you put a marshmallow (or preferably one of those marshmallow easter bunnies) in the jar, it will swell to many times its original size as the atmosphere is removed and the trapped air in the marshmallow expands. Let the air return and it immediately shrinks back.
"Lifetime subscription" to a particular piece of hardware that has a [useful] life of only a few years? This is like getting a "lifetime guarantee" on a 2002 desk calendar.
The "major catastrophe" it is designed to survive is something that physically destroys or isolates many nodes of the network. This was a simple traffic spike.
When you discover a great new way to solarize a print in the darkroom, you're saying that the one time you did it randomly was just "it", to be appreciated as such, and that there's no value in being able to do that trick again? Even if it was on a 4x6 test print of your cat?
Many people will reprint and rework a particular photo over and over again until it's exactly right. Photoshop makes that a lot easier and cheaper.
And outside of the Slashdot / Register / Ars Technica crowd, most people still see the geek as merely a tool. ZING!
Why not?! Digital beats analog on the "artistic manipulation" front by miles and miles, specifically because of Photoshop. What other kind of "artistic manipulation" would you allow, other than software? We are talking about a digital medium here.
Yes, it's true you can do many analog darkroom tricks with chemicals and cardboard circles. But Photoshop does all of those, and many many more, more quickly, more easily, more repeatably and flexibly and cheaply and undo-ably . . . There are some legitimate reasons to argue analog over digital, but image manipulation is not one of them.
They got it right the first time . . . but that was years ago now.
Common misconception. They are modems. They modulate and demodulate. They fit the definition, too.
It's just like the fact that your insurance is higher because you're (presumably) male and (presumably) young. There is a correlation.
If you don't like your insurance policy, you should change companies. If you think speed limits are too low, you should lobby your local politicians about it. Your method has you bringing a fraudulent case, lying to the court, and costing taxpayers money by tying up the court with this bullshit. Just be a man and own up to your actions.
Just because you can get away with something doesn't make it OK. I hear shoplifting is pretty easy.
Even if you're actually guilty?