He did actually mention longevity in the article, maybe you should read it again.
If you're going to keep your machine for more than 2 years, you might not want to do this kind of thing. If you're a mad component-switcher, don't worry about it.
Or don't OC your video card, maybe buy a CPU that is a couple notches slower/cooler.
Or, be someone hesitant:) and let someone else have the fun!
There will be another tax revolt in this country, should something silly like that happen. There is no hope for massive tax increases (which a 33% increase in total taxes certainly would be!).
And I'll be on the front line, tossing tea into the harbor...
Re:Swapping Values Without Using a Temporary Varia
on
The Python Cookbook
·
· Score: 1
Bigger question: Who cares if you can swap values without using a temporary var? Is this important in some way?
This is, actually, an interesting perspective that doesn't get enough attention.
Just a quick aside: Build more mail checkers, maybe someone can come with the greatest one yet... applets don't add bloat in and of themselves.
The trouble is, the people writing the applications have good machines and see the performance as "good enough" for them. They dont' ever run Gnome and KDE on old systems, or they'd see the crawl, the jumpy window moves and so on...
I can say they don't, because if they did, it'd drive 'em nuts and they'd spend some time on optimizations.:)
At least using Linux I can chop out the stuff I don't care for (I'm using WM for now...) and speed up the system myself, while the Gnome stuff I need (like Gnumeric) can still run when I need it!
Hmm, might be interesting to think that a few hundred people reading each others' weblogs might slowly creep up to become something significant.
The "and growing" part of your post is the only interesting bit. Imagine in a handful of years if there are a few 10's of thousands of logs out there. You might see some interesting group dynamics.
Or not. But it's an interesting phenomenon, even if you don't read any of them (which I don't).
So, if someone actually IS a beginner, why is this bad? Why call it a book full of FUD when it exposes potential beginners to some of the issues that are out there?
Certainly almost any IT subject is too complex to put into a single book. But that doesn't mean people would be unable to get a leg up from such a tome. Right?
Oh man, thanks for that visualization. I think I just wet myself. Please, Moorcock, please! Give us Stormbringer! (uh, just not as a Fox / WB / UPN series, heheh)
You apparently have failed to understand the critical mind.
Perhaps you should go re-read the Golden Rule and come back to me and say I'd accept rape and murder if society legalized it. It has nothing to do with what laws are on the books. Common ethics have nothing to do with God, or Law, though Law attempts to mirror common ethics most of the time.
It's also interesting to me that you believe that somehow the idea that someone does not practice vice X (smoke/drink/etc) is irrelevant. That's silly.
Morality is dynamic. In certain societies, stoning is a moral punishment. Even in your religion. If morality was never-changing, how can you accept adulterors without stoning them to death?
At least I am proud enough of my reasoned beliefs to put my name to them, while you are a coward.
Well I certainly don't have any earth-shattering ideas...:)
I don't disagree with your more reasoned point here: it would be great if we could point at something and say, "Look, MS doesn't have that!" but I'm not going to be angry / disappointed if it doesn't happen for a while.
I admit that I am the judgemental type, but I have not lost your civility, or attempt to redress your mis-phrased post.
I'm curious: What limits are there to PHP that can be handled with Perl? Do you have an example? Or JSP for that matter. I have been of a mind for quite a while that all three can handle essentially the same things.
Thanks for an honest response. The reason Clean Flicks is different is because they are commercial.
A home user could certainly buy a movie, take it down to a "Clean Flicks" style of place, have them "process" the movie and hand it back... that, I have no problem with. It's also not a problem if that home user wants to go make a copy for himself, or sell his copy to a friend.
The problem comes with someone trying to build a commercial enterprise using someone else's copyrighted work, without permission.
Well, I'll give up now, no doubt noone will ever read this...
I wonder where you came up with the idea that my post was a troll? I'm genuinely curious, maybe I'll even check back here someday to see if you respond.
My point is still out there, which you so deftly avoided with the ad hominem "you're a troll, therefore everything you say is bunk" attack.
Why should any company be allowed to take a real, physical product, produced by a second company, mess with it blatantly disregarding the laws of copyright, and resell it?
Bush allowed it to happen? Interesting mix of abject leftism and conspiracy theory.
"So we have a murderous coward in office who is only there because he cheated."
Hmm, interesting theory you have there. I hardly support everything President Bush does (and I did, in fact, vote for Harry Browne). However, I see little reason to belittle him, even when I do disagree with his policies, and I certainly don't cry sour grapes about the outcome of a political fiasco that neither side deserved to win.
As for your "blatant ignorance" comment, it's ad hominem and essentially turns the rest of your point (whatever it might have been) to mush.
Uhhhhhhhh, isn't that what competition / the free market is all about?
Would you rather have patents and copyrights locking every innovation down so there is only one of each? Hmm...
I expect you believe we should all be driving Model T Fords then eh?
Name one thing that has been produced that hasn't been copied. Now, I'll grant you that there are probably plenty of things created in the last few months that haven't been yet, but anything older?
Now, buried in the pile of snide there is a point that Gnome/Helix/Ximian were doing this for quite some time and the original poster didn't notice, but the abject rudeness blows it all away. Thanks.
You should save a copy of that post to show people, because he's right and you're wrong.
How many people can possibly believe it's cool for company B to take company A's work, mess around with it, and resell it?? That's obscene.
Let's say, for instance, SomeCompany took Microsoft's Windows 2000 Server product, changed a few things around, messed with some settings, and re-sold it as "Clean Windows". Would they not deserve to be sued out of existence?
And your nonsensical bit about "forcing" people to watch bits they don't want to see... No one forces anyone to watch anything, last I checked.
I believe you completely misunderstood what the Times meant by "Consumer", and I'm surprised people modded you up to 4 (at last check). Maybe more people have a hard time with comprehension than I thought.
The context here has/nothing/ to do with the computing skills of the "average American consumer", it has to do in economic terms with "The Consumer". What does that mean? In simplest terms, competition is good.
Even if none of the 90% bothers to jump ship to Linux, the competitive pressures will force MS to build a better product. And that is what the Times is getting at.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh wow are you left on center.
The current system is broken because we are all paying for health care we don't need. And paying a lot.
And we're sold on it by our reps who say we should ALL be fully covered for every freakin' dime of medical expenses, which is just plain stupid.
All I need is catastrophic coverage. I don't need to have my $100 trip to the doc (once a year) cut down to $20. Who the hell does that help?
My suggestion for you: move to Germany if it's so grand. When I break $100k, I'd rather have more than half of that in my pocket, thanks.
I can't help but wonder, if they made taxes voluntary, would you still pay 40%?
He did actually mention longevity in the article, maybe you should read it again.
:) and let someone else have the fun!
If you're going to keep your machine for more than 2 years, you might not want to do this kind of thing. If you're a mad component-switcher, don't worry about it.
Or don't OC your video card, maybe buy a CPU that is a couple notches slower/cooler.
Or, be someone hesitant
This should be modded down as -1, Stale, just like you said in your original (also funny, like this one actually) post to this article.
Just curious, aside from branding, what the hell does "Excel" have to do with anything?
:-D
Or "Mozilla"? Or "350Z"
Don't whine about a lack of descriptive names in OSS. They're everywhere.
There will be another tax revolt in this country, should something silly like that happen. There is no hope for massive tax increases (which a 33% increase in total taxes certainly would be!).
And I'll be on the front line, tossing tea into the harbor...
Bigger question: Who cares if you can swap values without using a temporary var? Is this important in some way?
No really, I'm no CS major, I have no idea.
This is, actually, an interesting perspective that doesn't get enough attention.
:)
Just a quick aside: Build more mail checkers, maybe someone can come with the greatest one yet... applets don't add bloat in and of themselves.
The trouble is, the people writing the applications have good machines and see the performance as "good enough" for them. They dont' ever run Gnome and KDE on old systems, or they'd see the crawl, the jumpy window moves and so on...
I can say they don't, because if they did, it'd drive 'em nuts and they'd spend some time on optimizations.
At least using Linux I can chop out the stuff I don't care for (I'm using WM for now...) and speed up the system myself, while the Gnome stuff I need (like Gnumeric) can still run when I need it!
Hmm, might be interesting to think that a few hundred people reading each others' weblogs might slowly creep up to become something significant.
The "and growing" part of your post is the only interesting bit. Imagine in a handful of years if there are a few 10's of thousands of logs out there. You might see some interesting group dynamics.
Or not. But it's an interesting phenomenon, even if you don't read any of them (which I don't).
So, if someone actually IS a beginner, why is this bad? Why call it a book full of FUD when it exposes potential beginners to some of the issues that are out there?
Certainly almost any IT subject is too complex to put into a single book. But that doesn't mean people would be unable to get a leg up from such a tome. Right?
Oh man, thanks for that visualization. I think I just wet myself. Please, Moorcock, please! Give us Stormbringer! (uh, just not as a Fox / WB / UPN series, heheh)
Just one question, who gives a flying fart whether it's modded as Insightful or Informative? Either way it gets up to 5 so peeps like me can read it.
You apparently have failed to understand the critical mind.
Perhaps you should go re-read the Golden Rule and come back to me and say I'd accept rape and murder if society legalized it. It has nothing to do with what laws are on the books. Common ethics have nothing to do with God, or Law, though Law attempts to mirror common ethics most of the time.
It's also interesting to me that you believe that somehow the idea that someone does not practice vice X (smoke/drink/etc) is irrelevant. That's silly.
Morality is dynamic. In certain societies, stoning is a moral punishment. Even in your religion. If morality was never-changing, how can you accept adulterors without stoning them to death?
At least I am proud enough of my reasoned beliefs to put my name to them, while you are a coward.
Well I certainly don't have any earth-shattering ideas... :)
I don't disagree with your more reasoned point here: it would be great if we could point at something and say, "Look, MS doesn't have that!" but I'm not going to be angry / disappointed if it doesn't happen for a while.
I admit that I am the judgemental type, but I have not lost your civility, or attempt to redress your mis-phrased post.
I'm curious: What limits are there to PHP that can be handled with Perl? Do you have an example? Or JSP for that matter. I have been of a mind for quite a while that all three can handle essentially the same things.
Thanks for an honest response. The reason Clean Flicks is different is because they are commercial.
A home user could certainly buy a movie, take it down to a "Clean Flicks" style of place, have them "process" the movie and hand it back... that, I have no problem with. It's also not a problem if that home user wants to go make a copy for himself, or sell his copy to a friend.
The problem comes with someone trying to build a commercial enterprise using someone else's copyrighted work, without permission.
Well, I'll give up now, no doubt noone will ever read this...
I wonder where you came up with the idea that my post was a troll? I'm genuinely curious, maybe I'll even check back here someday to see if you respond.
My point is still out there, which you so deftly avoided with the ad hominem "you're a troll, therefore everything you say is bunk" attack.
Why should any company be allowed to take a real, physical product, produced by a second company, mess with it blatantly disregarding the laws of copyright, and resell it?
Bush allowed it to happen? Interesting mix of abject leftism and conspiracy theory.
"So we have a murderous coward in office who is only there because he cheated."
Hmm, interesting theory you have there. I hardly support everything President Bush does (and I did, in fact, vote for Harry Browne). However, I see little reason to belittle him, even when I do disagree with his policies, and I certainly don't cry sour grapes about the outcome of a political fiasco that neither side deserved to win.
As for your "blatant ignorance" comment, it's ad hominem and essentially turns the rest of your point (whatever it might have been) to mush.
Uhhhhhhhh, isn't that what competition / the free market is all about?
Would you rather have patents and copyrights locking every innovation down so there is only one of each? Hmm...
I expect you believe we should all be driving Model T Fords then eh?
Name one thing that has been produced that hasn't been copied. Now, I'll grant you that there are probably plenty of things created in the last few months that haven't been yet, but anything older?
I don't think so.
Why would someone mod this as informative?
Who is it informing?
How is it helpful to the conversation?
Now, buried in the pile of snide there is a point that Gnome/Helix/Ximian were doing this for quite some time and the original poster didn't notice, but the abject rudeness blows it all away. Thanks.
What is the purpose of the snide "no games" comment?
How does it add to the conversation?
How does it help prove any point?
Offtopic, but your sig makes me absolutely sick, and I even voted for another guy in the last election.
So, you'd rather have a murderous coward who takes civilian life as a standard operating procedure instead of reasoned debate and diplomacy?
That's quite possibly the most disgusting thing I've ever seen on screen.
And remember how "great" it was back a few years when you could jump from job to job, maybe 3 or 4 times a year?
I'm certainly not implying that you, in particular, have done this...
But why the hell should a company pay to train people if said people will just jump ship at the first sign of bigger dollars?
Free Agency cuts both ways, people.
You should save a copy of that post to show people, because he's right and you're wrong.
How many people can possibly believe it's cool for company B to take company A's work, mess around with it, and resell it?? That's obscene.
Let's say, for instance, SomeCompany took Microsoft's Windows 2000 Server product, changed a few things around, messed with some settings, and re-sold it as "Clean Windows". Would they not deserve to be sued out of existence?
And your nonsensical bit about "forcing" people to watch bits they don't want to see... No one forces anyone to watch anything, last I checked.
You know, even though I'm avidly pro-Linux in server situations, I can see through this one. You're pretty creative, brother.
I believe you completely misunderstood what the Times meant by "Consumer", and I'm surprised people modded you up to 4 (at last check). Maybe more people have a hard time with comprehension than I thought.
/nothing/ to do with the computing skills of the "average American consumer", it has to do in economic terms with "The Consumer". What does that mean? In simplest terms, competition is good.
The context here has
Even if none of the 90% bothers to jump ship to Linux, the competitive pressures will force MS to build a better product. And that is what the Times is getting at.