Oh come on! Just admitting that I'm right would be enough. I promise not to rub it in.
I must assume you've never used one of the three language of which we speak, because I have at work and there's absolutely no essential difference between VB.NET and C#, but there are huge differences between VB.NET and VB 6, so much so that no tool is able to convert from VB 6 to VB.NET with any kind-of maintainable (and working) result.
So please, don't argue just for the hell of it. Speak of what you know, not what you assume.
I think there was something like £100,000,000 spent on research to produce the Ribbon. Personally I like it. Intermediate and Advanced users are more productive with it than they were with menu/toolbar combination. Plus it's aesthetically pleasing, which is something I value quite highly in a UI.
The most important aspect of.NET is the libraries, and they're the same across both languages. I mean literally the same. The syntax is a bit different, but that's all. A C# to VB.NET source code converter is pretty trivial to construct. I don't think you could say the same for Python and Perl. And VB6 and VB.NET are totally different animals. VB.NET is much closer to C# than it is to VB6.
It's frightening how rumpsmackingly crap JS is as a language, yet it seems to be the Next Big Thing for software development according to all of the dribbling articles I keep reading about it.
I'm not right wing. I'm kind-of a half-breed. In the UK I would be called a "cross bencher", or a "floater" (don't laugh). But yes, a lot of this is anti American and anti-NATO, and cuts right into the fact that we are all evil Imperialists, except the Left of course, who only have the good of the people at heart. This is why Lefties like George Galloway would say to Saddam Hussein's face "I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability". Presumably he had no idea that he was addressing a mass murdering Ba'athist gangster? Who knows. Another prominent Leftie in the UK, Jody McIntrye, writes, "This is not a revolution; it is a western-backed, NATO-sanctioned, colonialist regime change in a sovereign African nation" when discussing the Libyan intervention. These people claim to represent the masses but what, if anything, are they offering them? There's no rational explanation for views like this except as anti-American contrarianism.
Anyway, I agree with Nick Cohen about the abrogation of any kind of moral compass by the Left over the last 25 years. If you read his book, you might too.
This is a very good point. Whenever I play video games I can't do anything other than choose "paragon". I would never kill civilians for fun in the game, even though they're just pixels. I find it really hard to suspend my sense of right or wrong, even though I'm suspending my sense of disbelief to get into the game in the first place. Some games like Bioshock for example, actively tap into feelings like that (I have to protect a small child through the map). Yes, I actually CRIED at the ending like a big soft twat.
My opinion (and I realise it isn't shared by the majority), is that if you don't back at least the aspiration to rid the world of people like Hussein, you are effectively supporting them. One can argue about the method, and the post-reconstruction plan was pathetic (actually non-existent), but I find it impossible to take any view other than that the world is a better place without him. Now, we have learned a lot about interventionism since and the more successful operation in Libya has proved it's possible provided you encourage the people to take the lead.
What I don't understand is that the same people who were against sanctions, the no-fly zone and the war, are the same people who come and demonstrate against Fascism here in the UK. The idea, articulated by Jody McIntyre here in the UK, is that freeing yourself from your local evil dictator is good, but if you do it with NATO help it's bad. So my view is that many people who articulate a belief against interventionism are not so much anti-war, as anti-US and anti-NATO.
Of course there is. You could start with the concept of Human Rights, based on the capacity to suffer; something that we ALL have in common, wherever we live. If you can't build a principled stand on any issue based on that, then you are simply dishonest.
Oh sure. But you support the Freedom Fighters in Libya, and the protesters in Syria, don't you? If you do, you're expressing a position . If you don't because you prefer the moral relativism expressed by the regimes there, and in places like North Korea, then you should fucking go and live there.
But you aren't so fucking sympathetic to the many thousands of people the Fascist dictatorship and its psychopathic leadership killed in Iraq, before the US set foot there, are you? You're a typical left-wing moral relativist who would rather attack the US and NATO when it acts against such vile dictatorships, but wring your hands when people say "but what shall we do?" for the people there in the absence of Western action. Yes that happens. Look at Rwanda. Nobody acted and 800,000 people were killed. But here's a shock, the Left criticises us for NOT acting in that instance too.
Oh I just love it when people who claim to be Liberal and Democrats (I don't mean that in the narrow US political party sense, I mean Liberal as in philosophy and Democrat as in Democratic) jump in and defend a Fascist dictatorship ruled over by a mass murdering psychopath, against the actions of United States and her allies. There's a great book called "What's Left?" by Nick Cohen that details the rise of moral relativism and the decay of Western values really rather well. I recommend you read it.
These things seem inexplicable to me. Surely people are capable of factoring inflation into their calculations? Here in the UK, we signed off for two aircraft carriers (Queen Elizabeth class) for £3.1bn. Now we're laying down two, will only have enough aircraft to put one in service, and the total cost has ballooned to nearer £6bn. Why? I'm guessing the people who commission these things are being screwed by the contractors, or are really genuinely incompetent.
A bit like Trigger's Broom. It's had 5 new handles and 7 new brushes, but it's still the same broom. Amazing to have been using the same broom for 25 years!
Slashdot Mirror
Oh come on! Just admitting that I'm right would be enough. I promise not to rub it in.
I must assume you've never used one of the three language of which we speak, because I have at work and there's absolutely no essential difference between VB.NET and C#, but there are huge differences between VB.NET and VB 6, so much so that no tool is able to convert from VB 6 to VB.NET with any kind-of maintainable (and working) result.
So please, don't argue just for the hell of it. Speak of what you know, not what you assume.
I think there was something like £100,000,000 spent on research to produce the Ribbon. Personally I like it. Intermediate and Advanced users are more productive with it than they were with menu/toolbar combination. Plus it's aesthetically pleasing, which is something I value quite highly in a UI.
Intellisense usually takes care of that for you.
Oh well. Someone got a nice yacht out of it :p.
The most important aspect of .NET is the libraries, and they're the same across both languages. I mean literally the same. The syntax is a bit different, but that's all. A C# to VB.NET source code converter is pretty trivial to construct. I don't think you could say the same for Python and Perl. And VB6 and VB.NET are totally different animals. VB.NET is much closer to C# than it is to VB6.
It's frightening how rumpsmackingly crap JS is as a language, yet it seems to be the Next Big Thing for software development according to all of the dribbling articles I keep reading about it.
Why "sadly" with visual basic .NET? I haven't used it for a good few years, but it's only superficially different from C#.
Isn't mp3 out of patent now?
Software patents aren't that hard to get in the EU. I know because I've got a few of them myself (named on them that is, through the corp I work for).
The only plan I see here is one to sequester millions of pounds of tax-payer's money into yet another unbelievably stupid mitigation scheme.
I'm not right wing. I'm kind-of a half-breed. In the UK I would be called a "cross bencher", or a "floater" (don't laugh). But yes, a lot of this is anti American and anti-NATO, and cuts right into the fact that we are all evil Imperialists, except the Left of course, who only have the good of the people at heart. This is why Lefties like George Galloway would say to Saddam Hussein's face "I salute your courage, your strength, your indefatigability". Presumably he had no idea that he was addressing a mass murdering Ba'athist gangster? Who knows. Another prominent Leftie in the UK, Jody McIntrye, writes, "This is not a revolution; it is a western-backed, NATO-sanctioned, colonialist regime change in a sovereign African nation" when discussing the Libyan intervention. These people claim to represent the masses but what, if anything, are they offering them? There's no rational explanation for views like this except as anti-American contrarianism.
Anyway, I agree with Nick Cohen about the abrogation of any kind of moral compass by the Left over the last 25 years. If you read his book, you might too.
If we made it our business then the world would be a better place.
This is a very good point. Whenever I play video games I can't do anything other than choose "paragon". I would never kill civilians for fun in the game, even though they're just pixels. I find it really hard to suspend my sense of right or wrong, even though I'm suspending my sense of disbelief to get into the game in the first place. Some games like Bioshock for example, actively tap into feelings like that (I have to protect a small child through the map). Yes, I actually CRIED at the ending like a big soft twat.
My opinion (and I realise it isn't shared by the majority), is that if you don't back at least the aspiration to rid the world of people like Hussein, you are effectively supporting them. One can argue about the method, and the post-reconstruction plan was pathetic (actually non-existent), but I find it impossible to take any view other than that the world is a better place without him. Now, we have learned a lot about interventionism since and the more successful operation in Libya has proved it's possible provided you encourage the people to take the lead.
What I don't understand is that the same people who were against sanctions, the no-fly zone and the war, are the same people who come and demonstrate against Fascism here in the UK. The idea, articulated by Jody McIntyre here in the UK, is that freeing yourself from your local evil dictator is good, but if you do it with NATO help it's bad. So my view is that many people who articulate a belief against interventionism are not so much anti-war, as anti-US and anti-NATO.
Of course there is. You could start with the concept of Human Rights, based on the capacity to suffer; something that we ALL have in common, wherever we live. If you can't build a principled stand on any issue based on that, then you are simply dishonest.
Oh sure. But you support the Freedom Fighters in Libya, and the protesters in Syria, don't you? If you do, you're expressing a position . If you don't because you prefer the moral relativism expressed by the regimes there, and in places like North Korea, then you should fucking go and live there.
The original article is no longer online. It was here: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-12/spanish-solar-panel-trade-group-calls-for-fraud-investigation.html. Google `spanish solar panel fraud' for more information.
But you aren't so fucking sympathetic to the many thousands of people the Fascist dictatorship and its psychopathic leadership killed in Iraq, before the US set foot there, are you? You're a typical left-wing moral relativist who would rather attack the US and NATO when it acts against such vile dictatorships, but wring your hands when people say "but what shall we do?" for the people there in the absence of Western action. Yes that happens. Look at Rwanda. Nobody acted and 800,000 people were killed. But here's a shock, the Left criticises us for NOT acting in that instance too.
Oh I just love it when people who claim to be Liberal and Democrats (I don't mean that in the narrow US political party sense, I mean Liberal as in philosophy and Democrat as in Democratic) jump in and defend a Fascist dictatorship ruled over by a mass murdering psychopath, against the actions of United States and her allies. There's a great book called "What's Left?" by Nick Cohen that details the rise of moral relativism and the decay of Western values really rather well. I recommend you read it.
It wasn't a good movie. It wasn't a bad movie. It was just a movie.
These things seem inexplicable to me. Surely people are capable of factoring inflation into their calculations? Here in the UK, we signed off for two aircraft carriers (Queen Elizabeth class) for £3.1bn. Now we're laying down two, will only have enough aircraft to put one in service, and the total cost has ballooned to nearer £6bn. Why? I'm guessing the people who commission these things are being screwed by the contractors, or are really genuinely incompetent.
It isn't a certainty.
It does, because in some countries (like Spain), it's actually profitable to fire up some lamps with a diesel generator to keep them going.
A bit like Trigger's Broom. It's had 5 new handles and 7 new brushes, but it's still the same broom. Amazing to have been using the same broom for 25 years!
The article in Nature says no such thing. It is far more nuanced, tentative and uncertain than your summary.
Human ancestors in Eurasia earlier than thought