Where is this "isolation"? A place where you are not legally required to have health insurance simply because you exist? A place where you are not liable for exhaling CO2? Where your earnings aren't pilfered for the purpose of murdering babies or teaching someone's else's views about the origin of species to children?
Because that place sounds better than here, and I don't think it exists anywhere.
That's just the Snowden stuff that they're anti-government. The slashdot attitude is 'Let's defraud and philander ourselves and others and impede the government from finding out about it.'
I think we are similar in that way. My car is in that price range, and my number one concern is keeping the costs down (my peers drive Porsches, vettes, etc).
Quality (like worth, value, goodness, etc) is a highly subjective term. I can get steak fries at a restaurant for twice the price of McDonald's fries. The steak fries are larger and cooked by a more trained/skilled chef, but this doesn't mean they are more worth that much extra to me (ok, every once in a while).
In the same way having more durable hoses might not be an investment that increases the lifespan of the car compared to other kinds of investments (something with the belt or cylinders) per USD/CDN. Or maybe I'd rather keep the difference. I'm not as familiar with cars.
I'm concerned about (1) the government telling me what quality is and (2) when I need it. In the same way countries with big governments concern me because they determine what you're going to eat and your options are usually very narrow.
Historically the government often ends up telling millions of people: you don't get to eat at all. During the 19th century US immigrants were very surprised to learn (and they wrote back to their families) that people here eat 3 meals a day. Limiting government helps with that.
Science can never observe value or recognize value, etc.
That single fact entails that it may bring practical advantages, but it can never tell you if anything is good or not. At worse it is existentially meaningless.
OK, glad you're not saying we should regulate for the sake of regulating.
That being said if your tubing and seals wouldn't have had problems without ethanol, the value add is similar to a battery recharger than can only recharge its own batteries.
Ordinary people understand that they shouldn't buy battery chargers that charge their own batteries. The government does not understand this.
I would rather have a cheaper car than one with "quality" that doesn't matter to me.
You seem to presuppose it's better to judge by appearances (i.e. science) than personal resolve (i.e. religion/spirituality).
That is the very definition of superficiality.
Only on \. could that be construed as persuasive.
Science was hampered in the middle ages mostly by bad economics (government/monarchical ownership of everything) and picked up dramatically during the commercially-initiated industrial revolution.
That's a good question. Some A-listers use that (NetApp).
In C# it's very simple:
var reversed = new string( oldString.Reverse().ToArray());
SQL server also has a REVERSE procedure, but it operates on the string, whereas the Linq one operates on a list of anything (chars in this case).
The downside of that question is probably that it is becoming ubiquitous. If you pick something more original you might spare yourself from a programmer who just googled "interview questions" and memorized the answers without being able to think more openly about solving these problems (as simple as they might be).
Corporations have to compete with each other. If they can afford to lower their prices, they will seriously consider that or risk going out of business. If you fix prices by government fiat (actually happened during the Nixon administration), supply dries up pretty fast.
It's exactly the same thing as an employer saying, "You're going to get paid less money now, and you can't go work somewhere else." Well, then people are not going to work. The problem is a lack of freedom, not missing enough layers of regulation.
And if you say, "Corporations aren't people..." Well, I'm a person, and I'm certainly not going to risk my money on something that won't return anything. I'd rather keep it under the mattress instead of investing it in a corporation (where people have opportunities to have a job, etc.). And then people lose their jobs, consumers lose options, assets move offshore. All this happens faster than anything the government can do to stop it.
Ah, war communism. You are aware that Stalin backed out of that because it was crippling the Soviet economy?
The founders of the US government believed the government was a bigger threat on the American people. The Bill of Rights is about protecting individuals from the government.
Do you give them the algorithm? Looks like Bailey, Borwein, and Plouffe got famous enough from figuring it out to having their names put on it. That seems like setting the bar a little high for a programmer position.
Slashdot Mirror
Where is this "isolation"? A place where you are not legally required to have health insurance simply because you exist? A place where you are not liable for exhaling CO2? Where your earnings aren't pilfered for the purpose of murdering babies or teaching someone's else's views about the origin of species to children?
Because that place sounds better than here, and I don't think it exists anywhere.
That's just the Snowden stuff that they're anti-government. The slashdot attitude is 'Let's defraud and philander ourselves and others and impede the government from finding out about it.'
I think we are similar in that way. My car is in that price range, and my number one concern is keeping the costs down (my peers drive Porsches, vettes, etc).
Quality (like worth, value, goodness, etc) is a highly subjective term. I can get steak fries at a restaurant for twice the price of McDonald's fries. The steak fries are larger and cooked by a more trained/skilled chef, but this doesn't mean they are more worth that much extra to me (ok, every once in a while).
In the same way having more durable hoses might not be an investment that increases the lifespan of the car compared to other kinds of investments (something with the belt or cylinders) per USD/CDN. Or maybe I'd rather keep the difference. I'm not as familiar with cars.
I'm concerned about (1) the government telling me what quality is and (2) when I need it. In the same way countries with big governments concern me because they determine what you're going to eat and your options are usually very narrow.
Historically the government often ends up telling millions of people: you don't get to eat at all. During the 19th century US immigrants were very surprised to learn (and they wrote back to their families) that people here eat 3 meals a day. Limiting government helps with that.
Your honor, I have succeeded in observing all the federal and state statutes as symbolism.
If it pleases the court I recommend that my imagination be recognized for the creative genius that it is.
I cannot be imposed upon to follow the US law code as a literal document as it would confine me to rigid parallel lines.
As you must have surely inferred, my commitment to lawful behavior is unassailable and completely genuine.
In practice it looks more like this.
People defrauding and philandering against me - BAD
Me defrauding and philandering against other people - GOOD
How can we allow both of these (conflicting) claims? Well, the theory of evolution.
Science can never observe value or recognize value, etc.
That single fact entails that it may bring practical advantages, but it can never tell you if anything is good or not. At worse it is existentially meaningless.
Giving a speech about protecting women is a different skill set than treating them fairly.
The speech-makers are trying to control other people: either with rhetoric or in many cases sexual assault.
This dude was another over-educated urbanite who needed to hear about Jesus. Not theoreticizing about social ettiquette reforms.
OK, glad you're not saying we should regulate for the sake of regulating.
That being said if your tubing and seals wouldn't have had problems without ethanol, the value add is similar to a battery recharger than can only recharge its own batteries.
Ordinary people understand that they shouldn't buy battery chargers that charge their own batteries. The government does not understand this.
I would rather have a cheaper car than one with "quality" that doesn't matter to me.
"part of the reason that cars have gotten better in the past 20 years is because of government regulations requiring ethanol"
That's quite a claim to make, and you don't explain in what way it has gotten better.
Are you claiming regulation has some kind of intrinsic value or something?
The word "selfish" is thrown around so sloppily these days.
... sheesh.
When I hear people use that word I just hear "blah blah blah".
Wanting your spouse to live is selfish
The slashdot murder crowd is a liability to the human race.
You seem to presuppose it's better to judge by appearances (i.e. science) than personal resolve (i.e. religion/spirituality).
That is the very definition of superficiality.
Only on \. could that be construed as persuasive.
Science was hampered in the middle ages mostly by bad economics (government/monarchical ownership of everything) and picked up dramatically during the commercially-initiated industrial revolution.
Americans have fat because they have wealth.
The French are thin because they are poor.
Is poverty so desirable to the world?
Obama is to the right of Republicans on this.
As a tea party guy, I support Obama on this one!
I am not joking.
The US government should shrink and spend less of my tax money on reading my emails.
OK. I see. You meant "military invasion" then instead of "military action".
I agree, although there's not very many people clamoring to invade Russia right now (Napoleon and Hitler aside).
That's what they told Raegan.
... military action.
... military action.
If military action is out of the question, then there isn't anything to stop Russia from simply taking over as much as it wants.
Russia is avoiding stepping on the toes of any NATO nation (Ukraine, Georgia aren't NATO nations) so it doesn't initiate
In other words Russia respects
Peace through strength.
That is some story!
As an old C++ dev, I think it's on the way out. Boeing is leaning more and more on embedded programming. I've found a lot of demand for C#/.NET.
That's a good question. Some A-listers use that (NetApp).
In C# it's very simple:
var reversed = new string( oldString.Reverse().ToArray());
SQL server also has a REVERSE procedure, but it operates on the string, whereas the Linq one operates on a list of anything (chars in this case).
The downside of that question is probably that it is becoming ubiquitous. If you pick something more original you might spare yourself from a programmer who just googled "interview questions" and memorized the answers without being able to think more openly about solving these problems (as simple as they might be).
I pick the framework I work with based on how many positions are open for it in my area.
I don't see a lot of listings like that.
I'm not saying the AGW case is based on colorful language, pre-digested opinions shuffled as facts, and naked assertions...
... but that appears to be how you are contending for it.
Corporations have to compete with each other. If they can afford to lower their prices, they will seriously consider that or risk going out of business. If you fix prices by government fiat (actually happened during the Nixon administration), supply dries up pretty fast.
..." Well, I'm a person, and I'm certainly not going to risk my money on something that won't return anything. I'd rather keep it under the mattress instead of investing it in a corporation (where people have opportunities to have a job, etc.). And then people lose their jobs, consumers lose options, assets move offshore. All this happens faster than anything the government can do to stop it.
It's exactly the same thing as an employer saying, "You're going to get paid less money now, and you can't go work somewhere else." Well, then people are not going to work. The problem is a lack of freedom, not missing enough layers of regulation.
And if you say, "Corporations aren't people
Ah, war communism. You are aware that Stalin backed out of that because it was crippling the Soviet economy?
The founders of the US government believed the government was a bigger threat on the American people. The Bill of Rights is about protecting individuals from the government.
If you raise prices on the "bad guys" (corporations) they just raise their prices.
I pay enough money already.
"Properly" sounds like it is a matter of etiquette.
I think we have far too much of that already.
The planet needs ... ?
I couldn't care less about the planet. I care about people.
Do you give them the algorithm? Looks like Bailey, Borwein, and Plouffe got famous enough from figuring it out to having their names put on it. That seems like setting the bar a little high for a programmer position.