As righteous as this sounds, there are two counterpoints to make:
1) do homosexual men *really* account for such a high number of rejected donors that it would make up for the shortfall? Somehow, I doubt it.
2) they aren't rejected (only) on the unfounded stigma of increased AIDS susceptibility, but on the *legitimate* basis that anal sex is damaging to extremely sensitive tissue, making it vulnerable to increased infections in general.
I don't think that means what you think it means. Trash talk is untrue and inflammatory. Netflix' wording is anything but and actually pretty conservative.
The Verizon network *is* crowded because they're willfully neglecting to build out the infrastructure as they should be.
When you make cheap, shitty, under-engineered, non-compatible systems that can't be commodotized because everyone is banking on their propriety system taking off and cornering the market... that you'll end up with a cheap, shitty, under-engineered system with major security flaws?
Yet another reason why Smart TVs are worse than useless.
There is no good way to type on a mobile system, they're not meant for content creation beyond the minimum. Not even those click-on keyboards for Windows tablets (all 5 of them) are any good. They're this soft, felty, flat bar of pointlessness with no tactility, that exist purely for style (and not much of it). Maybe you can get a *real* 102-key IBM PC keyboard connected via Bluetooth... but that pretty much defeats the purpose of a mobile device (consumption and feeding you ads)
The best you'll get is a mish-mash of Swype, pecking and autocorrect, and there's no standard or correct manner of using it. It's just what works for you individually.
If you to type, get a laptop. The best laptop keyboard you'll ever find is on a ThinkPad of the Core 2 generation, and if you're just typing, that's all you really need.
I just want my car to be a car. Hell, I barely even use the plain old stereo in mine. Anything some bullshit infotainment system can do, a smartphone can do faster and better. And you won't end up with a two-ton, obsolete, glorified tablet on wheels a year later (or less).
At most, any such systems should be nothing more than a standardized interface for controlling your smartphone. It could even have hardware buttons with standard control mappings, which would be great.
With the latest witch hunt out there for v"distracted drivers", I'm surprised I've never seen a proposal to ban or limit these things. I'm generally against curtailing technology by force of law, but in case, I would say good riddance.
...found that only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less. Mothers with newborns stopped working because they wanted to stay at home longer with their babies, and teenagers worked less because they weren't under as much pressure to support their families, which resulted in more teenagers graduating. In addition, those who continued to work were given more opportunities to choose what type of work they did. Forget found that in the period that Mincome was administered, hospital visits dropped 8.5 percent, with fewer incidences of work-related injuries, and fewer emergency room visits from car accidents and domestic abuse.[6] Additionally, the period saw a reduction in rates of psychiatric hospitalization, and in the number of mental illness-related consultations with health professionals.
But I guess it's still too hippydippy for even Canada to get past the now-archaic principle of earn-to-eat.
I'll set aside, for a moment, that capital punishment is barbaric and should not exist in a society that wishes to call itself free and humane.
But what is so difficult about performing an execution properly without subjecting the executee to unconscionable suffering? If an anesthesiologist can induce a patient into a temporary coma with perfect precision, so that the patient will feel no pain and be without consciousness during a surgical procedure, why the hell can't a prisoner be put into exactly the same state and *then* given a lethal dose of the death cocktail?
Let's just be clear about something: users do not *want* DRM. Users want *content* and begrudgingly or unwittingly accept DRM in order to get what they *actually* want.
Absolutely nobody has ever thought, "gee, I wish there was a way I could pay more money in order to do fewer things with the stuff I buy."
Not that it's surprising. It's about the most American concept in existence: ignore a problem chronically until ignoring it further would cause chaos... then smother it with money and hope it goes away.
The education system The financial crisis The war on drugs The war on terrorism (goddamn, America loves its wars)
No real plan, no forethought, just vulturous agencies and contractors circling the poor starving bastard, waiting to feast on that juicy pile of cash that they know will come soon enough.
Show me a national problem where this response isn't the default.
When I lease a car, I pay less than if I were paying off a loan. I can also offset any concern of depreciation at the end of the lease period by selecting a new car and making any appropriate payment adjustments. If I really like the car, I can buy out of the lease. Can I do any of that with this textbook?
When I rent an apartment, I don't have to worry about maintenance, renovations or yard work. That's the landlord's job. What's in it for me when I pay $200 for a book that I don't own?
When I rent bowling shoes, it's a small fraction of the cost of buying them. But I'm also free to go out and buy a pair of bowling shoes, and it won't be absurdly expensive. Can I do that with this text book?
In all of your examples, there is a mutual benefit to and reasonable compromise between both parties. In this situation, there is no such compromise or reasonable tradeoff. The publisher is trying to get a gravy train on the tracks and shitting on their "buyers" (because you can't really call them that anymore) to do it.
You're asking the wrong question. Programming isn't an end in itself, it's a means to an end. Ask yourself what practical application you want to accomplish, then teach yourself the appropriate language.
Personally, I always liked website development. I like that I can keep my fingers in a few pies that I enjoy -- graphic design, sometimes photography, the occasional copy writing and the code to put it all together. So, naturally, I gravitated towards PHP, JavaScript, HTML and CSS (OK, those last two aren't really programming). I'll admit, I like the instant feedback and gratification of interpreted languages.
So come up with an end goal that interests you, then do some research to find the best language(s) suited to the task. If it seems too complicated, scale back your ambitions a bit until you find something suitably challenging without being overwhelming, then work your way up. You'll find that many of the skills and principles you learn from one language translate pretty quickly to others.
It's not that websites shouldn't rely on JavaScript to function, it's that they shouldn't rely on *third-party* JavaScripts from jQuery, a thousand fucking ad servers, a plugin from here and there, Google tracking... that's why what should be a basic website takes forever to load: it's having to make requests to 50 different servers to load a single page.
JavaScript-dependent websites *can* be done properly. Most are not.
The hybrid approach where the domain is in 100% black while the protocol and trailing path is 50% black or so, is perfect. It enables you to mentally filter out the extra bits, but allows you to see those extra bits at a glance without requiring any further action.
Chrome, as usual, fucks everything up, and Firefox is sure to follow.
Slashdot Mirror
"Legal" means whatever you want it to mean when you're the one who gets to determine what it means.
As righteous as this sounds, there are two counterpoints to make:
1) do homosexual men *really* account for such a high number of rejected donors that it would make up for the shortfall? Somehow, I doubt it.
2) they aren't rejected (only) on the unfounded stigma of increased AIDS susceptibility, but on the *legitimate* basis that anal sex is damaging to extremely sensitive tissue, making it vulnerable to increased infections in general.
I don't think that means what you think it means. Trash talk is untrue and inflammatory. Netflix' wording is anything but and actually pretty conservative.
The Verizon network *is* crowded because they're willfully neglecting to build out the infrastructure as they should be.
American cars have been leaning over while turning for decades!
When you make cheap, shitty, under-engineered, non-compatible systems that can't be commodotized because everyone is banking on their propriety system taking off and cornering the market... that you'll end up with a cheap, shitty, under-engineered system with major security flaws?
Yet another reason why Smart TVs are worse than useless.
There is no good way to type on a mobile system, they're not meant for content creation beyond the minimum. Not even those click-on keyboards for Windows tablets (all 5 of them) are any good. They're this soft, felty, flat bar of pointlessness with no tactility, that exist purely for style (and not much of it). Maybe you can get a *real* 102-key IBM PC keyboard connected via Bluetooth... but that pretty much defeats the purpose of a mobile device (consumption and feeding you ads)
The best you'll get is a mish-mash of Swype, pecking and autocorrect, and there's no standard or correct manner of using it. It's just what works for you individually.
If you to type, get a laptop. The best laptop keyboard you'll ever find is on a ThinkPad of the Core 2 generation, and if you're just typing, that's all you really need.
But do you trust Apple enough to believe they haven't installed any backdoors in their closed-source software?
I just want my car to be a car. Hell, I barely even use the plain old stereo in mine. Anything some bullshit infotainment system can do, a smartphone can do faster and better. And you won't end up with a two-ton, obsolete, glorified tablet on wheels a year later (or less).
At most, any such systems should be nothing more than a standardized interface for controlling your smartphone. It could even have hardware buttons with standard control mappings, which would be great.
With the latest witch hunt out there for v"distracted drivers", I'm surprised I've never seen a proposal to ban or limit these things. I'm generally against curtailing technology by force of law, but in case, I would say good riddance.
It was tested in a small Canadian community, though not nearly on the scale you suggest it should be (for what it's worth, i agree with you)
The results seem pretty positive: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki...
...found that only new mothers and teenagers worked substantially less. Mothers with newborns stopped working because they wanted to stay at home longer with their babies, and teenagers worked less because they weren't under as much pressure to support their families, which resulted in more teenagers graduating. In addition, those who continued to work were given more opportunities to choose what type of work they did. Forget found that in the period that Mincome was administered, hospital visits dropped 8.5 percent, with fewer incidences of work-related injuries, and fewer emergency room visits from car accidents and domestic abuse.[6] Additionally, the period saw a reduction in rates of psychiatric hospitalization, and in the number of mental illness-related consultations with health professionals.
But I guess it's still too hippydippy for even Canada to get past the now-archaic principle of earn-to-eat.
I like my car interfaces the same way I like my computer interfaces: just do exactly what the fuck I tell it to.
Two problems:
1. Like hell he'll get a public trial, or any trial at all, before he's shipped off to Gitmo. Even if he does...
2. As once brilliantly stated (I think I saw it in a Slashdot sig), 12 people too stupid to get out of jury duty is not a jury of my peers.
I'll set aside, for a moment, that capital punishment is barbaric and should not exist in a society that wishes to call itself free and humane.
But what is so difficult about performing an execution properly without subjecting the executee to unconscionable suffering? If an anesthesiologist can induce a patient into a temporary coma with perfect precision, so that the patient will feel no pain and be without consciousness during a surgical procedure, why the hell can't a prisoner be put into exactly the same state and *then* given a lethal dose of the death cocktail?
Let's just be clear about something: users do not *want* DRM. Users want *content* and begrudgingly or unwittingly accept DRM in order to get what they *actually* want.
Absolutely nobody has ever thought, "gee, I wish there was a way I could pay more money in order to do fewer things with the stuff I buy."
To be fair, they both screw people in the ass.
Their own code
Not that it's surprising. It's about the most American concept in existence: ignore a problem chronically until ignoring it further would cause chaos... then smother it with money and hope it goes away.
The education system
The financial crisis
The war on drugs
The war on terrorism
(goddamn, America loves its wars)
No real plan, no forethought, just vulturous agencies and contractors circling the poor starving bastard, waiting to feast on that juicy pile of cash that they know will come soon enough.
Show me a national problem where this response isn't the default.
Teachers are.
Got it.
If SeaMonkey had tab groups, I'd switch in an instant.
When I lease a car, I pay less than if I were paying off a loan. I can also offset any concern of depreciation at the end of the lease period by selecting a new car and making any appropriate payment adjustments. If I really like the car, I can buy out of the lease. Can I do any of that with this textbook?
When I rent an apartment, I don't have to worry about maintenance, renovations or yard work. That's the landlord's job. What's in it for me when I pay $200 for a book that I don't own?
When I rent bowling shoes, it's a small fraction of the cost of buying them. But I'm also free to go out and buy a pair of bowling shoes, and it won't be absurdly expensive. Can I do that with this text book?
In all of your examples, there is a mutual benefit to and reasonable compromise between both parties. In this situation, there is no such compromise or reasonable tradeoff. The publisher is trying to get a gravy train on the tracks and shitting on their "buyers" (because you can't really call them that anymore) to do it.
You're asking the wrong question. Programming isn't an end in itself, it's a means to an end. Ask yourself what practical application you want to accomplish, then teach yourself the appropriate language.
Personally, I always liked website development. I like that I can keep my fingers in a few pies that I enjoy -- graphic design, sometimes photography, the occasional copy writing and the code to put it all together. So, naturally, I gravitated towards PHP, JavaScript, HTML and CSS (OK, those last two aren't really programming). I'll admit, I like the instant feedback and gratification of interpreted languages.
So come up with an end goal that interests you, then do some research to find the best language(s) suited to the task. If it seems too complicated, scale back your ambitions a bit until you find something suitably challenging without being overwhelming, then work your way up. You'll find that many of the skills and principles you learn from one language translate pretty quickly to others.
What will those 3 people do??
The fuck? You can't work on your own car in your own garage? I'd really like to see a citation for this.
It's not that websites shouldn't rely on JavaScript to function, it's that they shouldn't rely on *third-party* JavaScripts from jQuery, a thousand fucking ad servers, a plugin from here and there, Google tracking... that's why what should be a basic website takes forever to load: it's having to make requests to 50 different servers to load a single page.
JavaScript-dependent websites *can* be done properly. Most are not.
The hybrid approach where the domain is in 100% black while the protocol and trailing path is 50% black or so, is perfect. It enables you to mentally filter out the extra bits, but allows you to see those extra bits at a glance without requiring any further action.
Chrome, as usual, fucks everything up, and Firefox is sure to follow.