How about selling R&D that the R&D'ing company intends to sit on and not develop? Surely the suppression of progress is a great enough sin to warrant a leak -- and the money comes in handy trying to avoid The Man for the next ten years, so no begrudging that either.
Given that your interpretation of the "general principle of the thing" (fixed your sp for you, no need to thank) leads you to an obviously contradictory conclusion, have you taken the time to consider whether your interpretation isn't, in fact, bollocks?
Generally people who set up shit like WikiLeaks take far more time to come up with the concept than you do attempting to tear it down. It's unreasonable to assume that WikiLeaks' administrators were idiots or half-wits or otherwise of right-wing mental caliber. the classical vice of hubris is built on this same concept, i.e. that of overestimating oneself and by contrast the underestimation of others.
(Oh boy, that was a long and roundabout way to say "grow up, dickhead".)
However, now that I gave it a bit more consideration, I guess simply not folding before conquest noises from the USSR was pretty impressive given the times. Quite a few countries would have, and later on did.
I suppose in one way we ended up pioneering the concept of turning an "open and shut war, it'll be done before breakfast next monday" into a quagmire and a political embarrassment. That's the characteristic bloody-mindedness for you I guess.
Call it what you will; I like to call it "less than being conquered". Don't get me wrong -- it's vastly preferable to the other thing, but it's not a victory. Calling it such a thing is a leftover of the old cultural homogeneity that took a beating in the post-Soviet-breakup crash and the recession that followed. Reminding people of the lies they were fed during that time will get you weird looks, after which whatever you say goes in one ear and out the other.
Now with regard to the Quest for All Land Between The Border and The Urals, also known as Operation Barbarossa. I'll say that it was a pretty smart tactical move at the time: it wasn't all that certain that Nazi Germany wasn't going to win (though it's painfully obvious in retrospect). Taken this way, it was a method for hedging our bets and hopefully avoiding both Stalin's and Hitler's purges, whichever would end up victors.
Still, attacking Russia, even during the summer, was nothing short of madness brought on by jingoism and the belief that as allies of Nazi Germany we'd be invincible. ("What Soviet arms industries? They're just a bunch of ignorant farmers, aren't they. We'll have their cake just like the last time.") Between the wars, speaking publicly of peace and goodwill would get one locked up for treason. Not a nice time from a civil rights perspective.
As for museums, gee, I have really no idea. There's a museum of military aviation somewhere, and one about historical armor in Parola. The national museum in Helsinki has a permanent display of pre-independence arms and armor (as in personal armor. plate.). For this, you're really asking the wrong guy. Perhaps wikitravel would serve you better?
Do read up on finlandization, then. It's what we have now towards the US, the EU and NATO instead of what we used to have after the war and until 1991, when it was with regard to the USSR. Most everyone fucking hates that our so-called elected leaders are entirely spineless towards power of any kind.
We do have a bit of national pride with regard to the winter war. It's mostly misplaced: the main reason why that war went so well was that Stalin set the invasion up as a PR operation first and foremost. His troops had no supplies, no supply lines, not even proper winter wear. And yet they managed to conquer significant areas of land, which for some reason is billed as a "defensive victory".
The finnish army subsequently went on, encouraged by the "victory", to get their arses kicked alongside the foremost military might of the time, Nazi Germany. The Soviets were the ones doing the kicking, unsurprisingly.
I do not. This obligation is utterly misguided. Do you pay those who make roads each time you drive on those roads they made? Aren't you obligated to, in order to access the fruits of their labour? Road stealer.
As you should know, theft is a distinct thing entirely, distinguished by its bereavement aspect. Copyright infringement is, economically speaking, no worse than ignoring the game altogether. "The lengths to which people will go to justify their protestant self-whipping and catholic guilt confound me."
Please don't act stupid. We both know the extreme you present is as ridiculous as a housewife deciding which artists to toss in prison for life because their art annoys her.
But why are terrorists, communists, witches and drurrrrgs a threat? Because we have to protect the _chilrunses_.
See, that's what it comes down to. People who've got children of their own somehow seem to lose all reason if someone (who? why should they be taken at face value?) tells them that their children may be at risk. Not everyone, of course, but the socially isolated housewives and other people who're afflicted with a limited perspective.
It's the thing that got Socrates killed, really: people who really shouldn't have opinions on something, having opinions on that something. Uninformed, easily manipulated opinions. And they feel like they're experts, at the top of the world. Yet the stoneworker shouldn't be making statements about computer engineering, and the merchant should really have humility rather than hubris about his understanding of society at large.
In my experience budgies are rather clever too. It's just that they're stubborn (i.e. typically not inquisitive), often disinterested in "people stuff" and of course their little heads run at speeds where humans must seem very very slow indeed. And they usually die rather young compared to larger parrots (old age takes them between 7 and 10 years) so there's not so much that a single budgie will learn in its lifetime.
They do have lovely singing voices though compared to any other parrot. And they're quite robust and capable of handling themselves, so not prone to accidents... which I guess comes from the stubbornness.
But they have wonderful social intelligence. Always chatting and paying attention, unless asleep or eating or something. Traveling in huge flocks in the wild does that to a species, I suppose.
Look up "herd immunity". I think you'll find that this phenomenon nicely kills your argument when enough people take the risk.
It's interesting to see how this sort of thing provokes these responses that can't be described as anything except petty individualism. "Well vaccination is my choice dammit and you'll pry it from my cold dead NRA-member fingers."
That's not so bad. You'll know you're not using them well from the segfaults, which are instantly debuggable with gdb and valgrind.
Whereas with managed-runtime languages like C# and Java and Python and Ruby, you only know that you're not using the language well from the utterly ridiculous hardware requirements of the program. Which is a flag that for a person who got into software engineering in 2002 completely doesn't start waving until somewhere around the "2 gigahertz and 2 gigabytes until it runs smoothly" mark.
Therefore, proper use of C or C++ results in efficient applications more often than in C# or Java. Assuming that the person asking the article's question is not an idiot who would sorely require padded gloves such as C# or Java, it would be a smart idea to learn C. (Or possibly C++, even though it's sort of horrifying.)
You could also just learn to also consider object lifetimes like smart people do. Calling free() or delete or [release] in that case becomes far less of an ordeal, and makes your code's behaviour far more predictable.
Slashdot Mirror
Also the almighty "is not a suicide pact".
How about selling R&D that the R&D'ing company intends to sit on and not develop? Surely the suppression of progress is a great enough sin to warrant a leak -- and the money comes in handy trying to avoid The Man for the next ten years, so no begrudging that either.
Given that your interpretation of the "general principle of the thing" (fixed your sp for you, no need to thank) leads you to an obviously contradictory conclusion, have you taken the time to consider whether your interpretation isn't, in fact, bollocks?
Generally people who set up shit like WikiLeaks take far more time to come up with the concept than you do attempting to tear it down. It's unreasonable to assume that WikiLeaks' administrators were idiots or half-wits or otherwise of right-wing mental caliber. the classical vice of hubris is built on this same concept, i.e. that of overestimating oneself and by contrast the underestimation of others.
(Oh boy, that was a long and roundabout way to say "grow up, dickhead".)
Or the neanderthals ate one another, the crazy old cannibals they.
See, no guilt for our bloody ancient forefathers and -mothers.
Well yes. If you count "returning an error code and setting errno to ENOSYS" as compliance.
This is called syndication. You should look it up.
However, now that I gave it a bit more consideration, I guess simply not folding before conquest noises from the USSR was pretty impressive given the times. Quite a few countries would have, and later on did.
I suppose in one way we ended up pioneering the concept of turning an "open and shut war, it'll be done before breakfast next monday" into a quagmire and a political embarrassment. That's the characteristic bloody-mindedness for you I guess.
Call it what you will; I like to call it "less than being conquered". Don't get me wrong -- it's vastly preferable to the other thing, but it's not a victory. Calling it such a thing is a leftover of the old cultural homogeneity that took a beating in the post-Soviet-breakup crash and the recession that followed. Reminding people of the lies they were fed during that time will get you weird looks, after which whatever you say goes in one ear and out the other.
Now with regard to the Quest for All Land Between The Border and The Urals, also known as Operation Barbarossa. I'll say that it was a pretty smart tactical move at the time: it wasn't all that certain that Nazi Germany wasn't going to win (though it's painfully obvious in retrospect). Taken this way, it was a method for hedging our bets and hopefully avoiding both Stalin's and Hitler's purges, whichever would end up victors.
Still, attacking Russia, even during the summer, was nothing short of madness brought on by jingoism and the belief that as allies of Nazi Germany we'd be invincible. ("What Soviet arms industries? They're just a bunch of ignorant farmers, aren't they. We'll have their cake just like the last time.") Between the wars, speaking publicly of peace and goodwill would get one locked up for treason. Not a nice time from a civil rights perspective.
As for museums, gee, I have really no idea. There's a museum of military aviation somewhere, and one about historical armor in Parola. The national museum in Helsinki has a permanent display of pre-independence arms and armor (as in personal armor. plate.). For this, you're really asking the wrong guy. Perhaps wikitravel would serve you better?
Do read up on finlandization, then. It's what we have now towards the US, the EU and NATO instead of what we used to have after the war and until 1991, when it was with regard to the USSR. Most everyone fucking hates that our so-called elected leaders are entirely spineless towards power of any kind.
We do have a bit of national pride with regard to the winter war. It's mostly misplaced: the main reason why that war went so well was that Stalin set the invasion up as a PR operation first and foremost. His troops had no supplies, no supply lines, not even proper winter wear. And yet they managed to conquer significant areas of land, which for some reason is billed as a "defensive victory".
The finnish army subsequently went on, encouraged by the "victory", to get their arses kicked alongside the foremost military might of the time, Nazi Germany. The Soviets were the ones doing the kicking, unsurprisingly.
I do not. This obligation is utterly misguided. Do you pay those who make roads each time you drive on those roads they made? Aren't you obligated to, in order to access the fruits of their labour? Road stealer.
As you should know, theft is a distinct thing entirely, distinguished by its bereavement aspect. Copyright infringement is, economically speaking, no worse than ignoring the game altogether. "The lengths to which people will go to justify their protestant self-whipping and catholic guilt confound me."
There are advantages to heterogeneity, you know.
The company pays its employees. I have no obligation to pay the company, either as a player of a game they made or as a non-player of that same game.
I only had enough to go in the subject field. Please read it, and not this comment's body.
Well yes, the greeks did sort of invent (or at least designate) drama.
At least as long as the input data, anyway. And then they might be reversible, which is just as big a problem.
So yes, cryptographic hashing is a game of tradeoffs. What isn't?
But what will you do for I/O, then?
Indeed, the experts should have humility also.
Please don't act stupid. We both know the extreme you present is as ridiculous as a housewife deciding which artists to toss in prison for life because their art annoys her.
But why are terrorists, communists, witches and drurrrrgs a threat? Because we have to protect the _chilrunses_.
See, that's what it comes down to. People who've got children of their own somehow seem to lose all reason if someone (who? why should they be taken at face value?) tells them that their children may be at risk. Not everyone, of course, but the socially isolated housewives and other people who're afflicted with a limited perspective.
It's the thing that got Socrates killed, really: people who really shouldn't have opinions on something, having opinions on that something. Uninformed, easily manipulated opinions. And they feel like they're experts, at the top of the world. Yet the stoneworker shouldn't be making statements about computer engineering, and the merchant should really have humility rather than hubris about his understanding of society at large.
In my experience budgies are rather clever too. It's just that they're stubborn (i.e. typically not inquisitive), often disinterested in "people stuff" and of course their little heads run at speeds where humans must seem very very slow indeed. And they usually die rather young compared to larger parrots (old age takes them between 7 and 10 years) so there's not so much that a single budgie will learn in its lifetime.
They do have lovely singing voices though compared to any other parrot. And they're quite robust and capable of handling themselves, so not prone to accidents... which I guess comes from the stubbornness.
But they have wonderful social intelligence. Always chatting and paying attention, unless asleep or eating or something. Traveling in huge flocks in the wild does that to a species, I suppose.
Actually, every time you don't masturbate, god kills a kitten. Think of the kittens.
He omits his conclusion, because it is trivially disprovable. It's a common tactic among the right-wingers.
I guess conspiracy denialism is the new truther movement, eh.
Look up "herd immunity". I think you'll find that this phenomenon nicely kills your argument when enough people take the risk.
It's interesting to see how this sort of thing provokes these responses that can't be described as anything except petty individualism. "Well vaccination is my choice dammit and you'll pry it from my cold dead NRA-member fingers."
That's not so bad. You'll know you're not using them well from the segfaults, which are instantly debuggable with gdb and valgrind.
Whereas with managed-runtime languages like C# and Java and Python and Ruby, you only know that you're not using the language well from the utterly ridiculous hardware requirements of the program. Which is a flag that for a person who got into software engineering in 2002 completely doesn't start waving until somewhere around the "2 gigahertz and 2 gigabytes until it runs smoothly" mark.
Therefore, proper use of C or C++ results in efficient applications more often than in C# or Java. Assuming that the person asking the article's question is not an idiot who would sorely require padded gloves such as C# or Java, it would be a smart idea to learn C. (Or possibly C++, even though it's sort of horrifying.)
You could also just learn to also consider object lifetimes like smart people do. Calling free() or delete or [release] in that case becomes far less of an ordeal, and makes your code's behaviour far more predictable.