If you consider this a disproportionate response, consider two things. First, one side is deliberately targeting civilians. The other side does everything it can to use its own civilians as shields. The fact that there is any debate about this after 70 years of this nonsense goes to show how effective it is to callously sacrifice the lives of your own people for the purposes of propaganda.
If no rockets had been launched in the first place then those 1000 Palestinians would still be alive. Period.
Your rhetoric would carry a little more weight if there hadn't been a systematic attempt to destroy Israel since the year it was formed by the UN.
If your neighbor is constantly firing rockets into your country, targeting civilians, you might see things a little differently. If the Palestinians didn't have weapons, there would be peace. If Israel didn't have weapons, there would be no Israel. The "annexed" territory was land captured as the result of war of aggression started against Israel. In any other situation, people would recognize this, but it seems that anti-semitism is still deeply ingrained in the popular consciousness, especially on the Left.
Regardless of whether they sometimes go over the line in defending themselves, there's no denying that this situation was not started by and is not perpetuated by Israel. The "Palestinian" problem would disappear overnight if one of the many Muslim countries in the area would allow them to relocate. Israel didn't create itself. It was created by the UN, one of the very few useful things the UN ever did, and has fought several wars initiated by neighbors to defend its territory. But no one ever seems to care that the country is surrounded by a large number of people who are dedicated to its annihilation and the world seems to put people with this intent on the same moral level as a people who are simply trying to maintain their security. It's kind of hard to negotiate in good faith with people whose charter declares that their goal is to drive you into the sea.
The real "Palestinian" problem is that the Palestinians are pawns in a propaganda war against the Jewish people, and the world has been falling for this transparent trick for 70 years.
I know this may be blasphemy for a lot of folks, but I wasn't that impressed with "Do Androids Dream?". I think "Blade Runner" was a superior story, and of course, it's an excellent movie all around. I hope I don't have to turn in my Nerd card now.
I read this as part of a "Science Fiction" course in college about 30 years ago. I don't recall much about it except that I really dug the alternate-history aspect of the book.
I hope the movie happens and it turns out good. We need more good science fiction movies, because there haven't been many in the last 20-some years. I liked "Europa Report" but the format was pretty cliched, and the movie was almost the same as "Apollo 18", but less improbable. To be honest, I have a hard time remembering any really good SF movies since "Contact". I never saw the remake of "Solaris", but the original was amazing.
But we need more SF films. Most "SF" films today are just action movies or horror movies in a SFal setting, which is a fine way to do things, but it's not really SF.
That doesn't matter. He's saying that if the "EC Econoboxes" were driven like US cars are, the fatalities would be much worse. Around here, a lot of people commute on the Washington Beltway, which is a pretty crazy road to commute on. I once had someone pass me on the left when I was in the left lane. In other words, I was doing 60-ish mph in the left lane approaching a left exit and someone was so impatient he passed me on the shoulder. Do as many people in the UK drive on these massive and complicated interstate-style highways? That would make a difference. If I'm driving 1000 km back and forth to the market, it's probably going be less dangerous than 200 km in 120-kph rush hour traffic and rampant road rage.
I'm not saying he's necessarily right, but he didn't disprove him own point. Maybe the UK just has much, much safer drivers and cars than the rest of Europe (since most of the worst countries listed are in Europe). Maybe it's driving on the left. Maybe it's the better beer. [shrug]
For example, when adding some new code I will often put it at the beginning of the line (ie with no indent) so I can see it more clearly whilst coding (usually this is for temporary tracing lines), and only indent it before commit.
I do that in C++ all the time, especially when it's something I don't intend to keep. This is definitely something that you can't do in Python, but that doesn't keep me from liking it.
With Python, on the other hand, I'm actually more likely to have an error in the indenting, because there's no easy way to see how many blocks I'm terminating when I outdent by an arbitrary amount.
I've never really had that problem, but then I always break up code into reasonable sized functions so the nesting doesn't get too deep. Perhaps that's what you need to change.
I thought the whole whitespace-dependent thing was a crock too, coming from 20 years of mostly C++, but since I'm already obsessive about code formatting, I found it very natural and comfortable once I started using Python.
I used Pascal for almost all of my CS courses (but this was in the mid 80s). I got my first job as a C programmer with no formal C experience, but that wasn't a problem, and I never had any problems adapting to new languages during my career as needed. I like some languages more than others, but I can get the job done in anything needed with a short learning curve. I've done mostly C++, which I enjoy, and picked up Python on my own a couple years ago, which I love. I wouldn't call myself a Python expert by any stretch, but I could become one in short order if the need arose. It's all about the programming: Thinking logically, breaking tasks down in discrete steps that do the right thing, knowing what can go wrong. The language is just syntax. It might make some things easier and some things harder, but they're all doable.
It's not a spin at all. In order for Microsoft to prove to governments that their software does what it's supposed to, they are willing to share the source, because that's the only way you can really trust software. It's not spin to say that you cannot truly trust software unless you can see the source (and understand it, and be able to build it, etc., etc.)
Microsoft isn't implying that. They trying to convince customers they don't have NSA backdoors.... by opening the source to their products (to certain parties). In other words, you cannot trust software unless you can see the source. It's a pretty clear implication to me.
Wow, so one of their major goals is to release something people actually want to upgrade to.
Way to set your sights low, Microsoft.
Perhaps you should admit that Metro was nothing other than your executives suffering from collective lust explosion over Apple taking 30% off the top of every app sale and hoping that MS could force Windows users into the same situation.
We have all that, but not the automated tests for the stuff I'm involved with (other departments probably do). It's something my manager has been making a push for in the past few months (and I'm totally on board with), but it's going to take a lot of time because of the sheer amount of legacy code.
Then there are all the incentives to make traffic worse... stop light cameras that generate revenue but don't increase safety because the yellows are too short. Or the urban legend that shopkeepers push to get lights timed so more cars are stopped out in front of their shops, an idea that's believable, although I don't know if it's true. Then of course, there are bad driving habits, and the fact that one tailgater or one slowpoke can cause major cascades that lead to huge backups (and I'm not talking about accidents).
I'm a developer. Honestly, I've never worked anywhere that did much in the way of automated testing. It's something that's always bugged me and something I've always pushed for.
Heh. I'm tempted to say that with C++ you can get a huge unreadable mess of error messages, but with Java, the huge unreadable mess you get is the code, but that's not fair to the language.
Slashdot Mirror
If you consider this a disproportionate response, consider two things. First, one side is deliberately targeting civilians. The other side does everything it can to use its own civilians as shields. The fact that there is any debate about this after 70 years of this nonsense goes to show how effective it is to callously sacrifice the lives of your own people for the purposes of propaganda.
If no rockets had been launched in the first place then those 1000 Palestinians would still be alive. Period.
Whoops. Don't start introducing facts into evidence. Nothing good can come of that.
If someone declares their intent to kill you, then I think they are fair game. I'm all for taking people at their word.
Your rhetoric would carry a little more weight if there hadn't been a systematic attempt to destroy Israel since the year it was formed by the UN.
If your neighbor is constantly firing rockets into your country, targeting civilians, you might see things a little differently. If the Palestinians didn't have weapons, there would be peace. If Israel didn't have weapons, there would be no Israel. The "annexed" territory was land captured as the result of war of aggression started against Israel. In any other situation, people would recognize this, but it seems that anti-semitism is still deeply ingrained in the popular consciousness, especially on the Left.
Regardless of whether they sometimes go over the line in defending themselves, there's no denying that this situation was not started by and is not perpetuated by Israel. The "Palestinian" problem would disappear overnight if one of the many Muslim countries in the area would allow them to relocate. Israel didn't create itself. It was created by the UN, one of the very few useful things the UN ever did, and has fought several wars initiated by neighbors to defend its territory. But no one ever seems to care that the country is surrounded by a large number of people who are dedicated to its annihilation and the world seems to put people with this intent on the same moral level as a people who are simply trying to maintain their security. It's kind of hard to negotiate in good faith with people whose charter declares that their goal is to drive you into the sea.
The real "Palestinian" problem is that the Palestinians are pawns in a propaganda war against the Jewish people, and the world has been falling for this transparent trick for 70 years.
I know this may be blasphemy for a lot of folks, but I wasn't that impressed with "Do Androids Dream?". I think "Blade Runner" was a superior story, and of course, it's an excellent movie all around. I hope I don't have to turn in my Nerd card now.
I read this as part of a "Science Fiction" course in college about 30 years ago. I don't recall much about it except that I really dug the alternate-history aspect of the book.
I hope the movie happens and it turns out good. We need more good science fiction movies, because there haven't been many in the last 20-some years. I liked "Europa Report" but the format was pretty cliched, and the movie was almost the same as "Apollo 18", but less improbable. To be honest, I have a hard time remembering any really good SF movies since "Contact". I never saw the remake of "Solaris", but the original was amazing.
But we need more SF films. Most "SF" films today are just action movies or horror movies in a SFal setting, which is a fine way to do things, but it's not really SF.
I always thought "hipster" was used to describe someone who does something in an inferior way just to be different.
That doesn't matter. He's saying that if the "EC Econoboxes" were driven like US cars are, the fatalities would be much worse. Around here, a lot of people commute on the Washington Beltway, which is a pretty crazy road to commute on. I once had someone pass me on the left when I was in the left lane. In other words, I was doing 60-ish mph in the left lane approaching a left exit and someone was so impatient he passed me on the shoulder. Do as many people in the UK drive on these massive and complicated interstate-style highways? That would make a difference. If I'm driving 1000 km back and forth to the market, it's probably going be less dangerous than 200 km in 120-kph rush hour traffic and rampant road rage.
I'm not saying he's necessarily right, but he didn't disprove him own point. Maybe the UK just has much, much safer drivers and cars than the rest of Europe (since most of the worst countries listed are in Europe). Maybe it's driving on the left. Maybe it's the better beer. [shrug]
having a generation of students that don't know how to use pointers seems, rather scary to me.
We've managed to get along with the first one, so another one won't be much worse.
You know, for things like memory allocation, pointers, and so on?
Compared to Java? I think it would hold its own.
I think there are good arguments for being exposed to C early, but I wouldn't say it necessarily should be a first language.
For example, when adding some new code I will often put it at the beginning of the line (ie with no indent) so I can see it more clearly whilst coding (usually this is for temporary tracing lines), and only indent it before commit.
I do that in C++ all the time, especially when it's something I don't intend to keep. This is definitely something that you can't do in Python, but that doesn't keep me from liking it.
With Python, on the other hand, I'm actually more likely to have an error in the indenting, because there's no easy way to see how many blocks I'm terminating when I outdent by an arbitrary amount.
I've never really had that problem, but then I always break up code into reasonable sized functions so the nesting doesn't get too deep. Perhaps that's what you need to change.
I thought the whole whitespace-dependent thing was a crock too, coming from 20 years of mostly C++, but since I'm already obsessive about code formatting, I found it very natural and comfortable once I started using Python.
I used Pascal for almost all of my CS courses (but this was in the mid 80s). I got my first job as a C programmer with no formal C experience, but that wasn't a problem, and I never had any problems adapting to new languages during my career as needed. I like some languages more than others, but I can get the job done in anything needed with a short learning curve. I've done mostly C++, which I enjoy, and picked up Python on my own a couple years ago, which I love. I wouldn't call myself a Python expert by any stretch, but I could become one in short order if the need arose. It's all about the programming: Thinking logically, breaking tasks down in discrete steps that do the right thing, knowing what can go wrong. The language is just syntax. It might make some things easier and some things harder, but they're all doable.
Because if we knew Esperanto, we could follow that Esperanto movie William Shatner starred in in 1965. That's pretty useful.
It's not a spin at all. In order for Microsoft to prove to governments that their software does what it's supposed to, they are willing to share the source, because that's the only way you can really trust software. It's not spin to say that you cannot truly trust software unless you can see the source (and understand it, and be able to build it, etc., etc.)
Microsoft isn't implying that. They trying to convince customers they don't have NSA backdoors. ... by opening the source to their products (to certain parties). In other words, you cannot trust software unless you can see the source. It's a pretty clear implication to me.
Yes. That is just such an appropriate thing to suggest to an Apple user.
"You know that company you use because you are a n00b or just lazy? You now need to become a network admin to deal with the stupid stuff they do."
Well, Microsoft users have been dealing with this for 25 years.
I'm sure you're right. Tailgaters too.
I've been doing C++ on and off for more than 20 years (mostly on) and just for that, I'm going to have to friend you.
Wow, so one of their major goals is to release something people actually want to upgrade to.
Way to set your sights low, Microsoft.
Perhaps you should admit that Metro was nothing other than your executives suffering from collective lust explosion over Apple taking 30% off the top of every app sale and hoping that MS could force Windows users into the same situation.
We have all that, but not the automated tests for the stuff I'm involved with (other departments probably do). It's something my manager has been making a push for in the past few months (and I'm totally on board with), but it's going to take a lot of time because of the sheer amount of legacy code.
Then there are all the incentives to make traffic worse... stop light cameras that generate revenue but don't increase safety because the yellows are too short. Or the urban legend that shopkeepers push to get lights timed so more cars are stopped out in front of their shops, an idea that's believable, although I don't know if it's true. Then of course, there are bad driving habits, and the fact that one tailgater or one slowpoke can cause major cascades that lead to huge backups (and I'm not talking about accidents).
I'm a developer. Honestly, I've never worked anywhere that did much in the way of automated testing. It's something that's always bugged me and something I've always pushed for.
As a former violist, I heartily endorse your comment.
Heh. I'm tempted to say that with C++ you can get a huge unreadable mess of error messages, but with Java, the huge unreadable mess you get is the code, but that's not fair to the language.