1k of code is simple in general to maintain. It probably has less bugs than 2k of code. It follows then that 999 bytes of code is simpler and probably has less probably of bugs than 1k of code. If you work with the logic, you arrive at the fact that if you write no code that is the simplest and most bug free version of anything you'll ever have.
Have you ever heard of a zero-day exploit to a peace of software that hasn't been written? Didn't think so!
Software development is really the domain of Zen monks.
Ah but see, once we look at the reason you signed up it's clear.
I went in the Corps post 9/11 because I was a traditional southern, christian, republican guy who among tons of other valid reasons wanted to dish out some payback to the terrorists organizations who did it.
You joined to dish some payback. The inability to dish payback caused you to doubt your work.
If you're going to join a service, do it to serve your country. The moment you join for your morality, your cause, or your emotions is when it is possible to be jaded. The first step is the dissolution of the notion of self.
If you want to serve your country, you'll serve your country. If you don't want to, you'll find a reason why your current course of action is not the right one. In life, there are no right or wrong answers. There are simply what we do and how we convince ourselves that we were right. That doesn't mean it was right (or wrong). If it helps you sleep better at night though, go for it.
Regardless, I thank you for your service. Whether it was done foolishly, wisely, or patriotically, service was rendered.
Some people serve their country, not their morality. They step up to service because their country needs their service, not because their morality agreed with the current course of action. It's a fairly simple statement of "I'm willing to set aside my beliefs to do what my country believes is the better course of action for it." These people form the basis of the career military service. They don't volunteer for a war. They volunteer for whatever their country requires of them. They'll be there before the war starts and they'll be there after it's done. Only fools volunteers for a war, but it is a patriot who signs up for service.
Morality is simply a justification for war. It allows those who believe in morality to support war without their conscience gnawing at them. It lets them ignore the wounded, the dead, and the human suffering that will follow. It does not avoid any of that.
Except that the CO2 increased 800 years AFTER the warming trend. In other words, warming CAUSED CO2 increases, the opposite of what he implied.
This may be related to the amount of carbon dioxide in solution in sea water. The ocean acts as a CO2 sink. As the temperature increases, there's more water vapor and more CO2 released from the ocean.
he'll say whatever he thinks will appeal to his blue-collar Irish Catholic base.
Why are we blaming him then? His voters put him in office. It's their discretion if they should not vote for him again if his actions don't meet their requirements. Political corruption and ineptness will always rise to meet society's acceptable level of corruption and ineptness.
Once they go over the level accepted by society, the politicians are removed in an appropriate manner.
If carbon dioxide increases global temperature, did carbon dioxide stop increasing since 1998?
Why did global warming seemingly stopped if carbon dioxide increase did not seemingly stop? Are the two related? Are they unrelated? What causes changes in global temperature? How much does human activity factor in?
If 2005 was the warmest year on record, how does the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere relate to the prior years and the later years? Were there more carbon dioxide or less?
If the global temperature moves in directions different than the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, what conclusions should we draw?
I'm a complete layman and haven't been paying attention to the science at all. You seem pretty clued in. Clue me in.
The defendant's targets were economic targets, not military. The target was on domestic soil. The Supreme Court decision was that military tribunal was the appropriate mechanism to try them. In summary, not a military target, on domestic soil, defendants were also not military according to the details of the case.
What's the point of winning if we can't get a candidate who agrees with us on everything? How far do we have to negotiate away the things we believe in until we're officially losing?
Let me try to explain to people who don't run companies real quickly why Objective-C is really appealing to apple by asking several questions.
Who drives the Objective-C language spec? Who drives the Objective-C runtime? Who does Apple need to ask permissions from to make modifications to the language or runtime? Ok then.
Let's pretend for a moment Apple decides to switch to Java. Who drives the Java language spec? Who drives the Java runtimes? Who would apple need to ask permissions from to make modifications to the language or runtime?
We good now? I'm pretty sure, being a business, Apple banks on business expediency over developer enthusiasm.
I have a hunch that Steve is looking for something a lot better than text copy-paste. Copy-paste done correctly is more complicated than you think it is.
If I copy text, does it copy attributes? Does bold text retains its boldness? Etc.
What happens when I want to copy an email address from the address book? Am I limited to copying read-only text or read-write text? Why can't I copy a whole address book entry? What happens when I paste the address book entry?
Snow Leopard's implementation of B isn't a freebie. You're still going to have to recognize where parallelization could happen and rewrite that part of the algorithm to be functional in nature. The run time isn't going to figure out what can be made parallel and do it for you from your existing code.
In fact, you'll have to use a whole new construct to make it possible.
Slashdot Mirror
1k of code is simple in general to maintain. It probably has less bugs than 2k of code. It follows then that 999 bytes of code is simpler and probably has less probably of bugs than 1k of code. If you work with the logic, you arrive at the fact that if you write no code that is the simplest and most bug free version of anything you'll ever have.
Have you ever heard of a zero-day exploit to a peace of software that hasn't been written? Didn't think so!
Software development is really the domain of Zen monks.
We didn't fight there before 2001. How'd that work out for us?
Ah but see, once we look at the reason you signed up it's clear.
I went in the Corps post 9/11 because I was a traditional southern, christian, republican guy who among tons of other valid reasons wanted to dish out some payback to the terrorists organizations who did it.
You joined to dish some payback. The inability to dish payback caused you to doubt your work.
If you're going to join a service, do it to serve your country. The moment you join for your morality, your cause, or your emotions is when it is possible to be jaded. The first step is the dissolution of the notion of self.
If you want to serve your country, you'll serve your country. If you don't want to, you'll find a reason why your current course of action is not the right one. In life, there are no right or wrong answers. There are simply what we do and how we convince ourselves that we were right. That doesn't mean it was right (or wrong). If it helps you sleep better at night though, go for it.
Regardless, I thank you for your service. Whether it was done foolishly, wisely, or patriotically, service was rendered.
Some people serve their country, not their morality. They step up to service because their country needs their service, not because their morality agreed with the current course of action. It's a fairly simple statement of "I'm willing to set aside my beliefs to do what my country believes is the better course of action for it." These people form the basis of the career military service. They don't volunteer for a war. They volunteer for whatever their country requires of them. They'll be there before the war starts and they'll be there after it's done. Only fools volunteers for a war, but it is a patriot who signs up for service.
Morality is simply a justification for war. It allows those who believe in morality to support war without their conscience gnawing at them. It lets them ignore the wounded, the dead, and the human suffering that will follow. It does not avoid any of that.
Except that the CO2 increased 800 years AFTER the warming trend. In other words, warming CAUSED CO2 increases, the opposite of what he implied.
This may be related to the amount of carbon dioxide in solution in sea water. The ocean acts as a CO2 sink. As the temperature increases, there's more water vapor and more CO2 released from the ocean.
he'll say whatever he thinks will appeal to his blue-collar Irish Catholic base.
Why are we blaming him then? His voters put him in office. It's their discretion if they should not vote for him again if his actions don't meet their requirements. Political corruption and ineptness will always rise to meet society's acceptable level of corruption and ineptness.
Once they go over the level accepted by society, the politicians are removed in an appropriate manner.
Are you saying there are other factors in what affects global warming than human activity? For example, El Nino?
We know that temperature tracks CO2.
Do we know that for sure? Plot a graph of global temperature. Now plot a graph of atmospheric CO2.
What do you see?
How do you prove that you are thinking for yourself? How do you prove that someone else isn't thinking for themselves?
Thinking for yourself does not equal switching channels.
If carbon dioxide increases global temperature, did carbon dioxide stop increasing since 1998?
Why did global warming seemingly stopped if carbon dioxide increase did not seemingly stop? Are the two related? Are they unrelated? What causes changes in global temperature? How much does human activity factor in?
If 2005 was the warmest year on record, how does the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere relate to the prior years and the later years? Were there more carbon dioxide or less?
If the global temperature moves in directions different than the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, what conclusions should we draw?
I'm a complete layman and haven't been paying attention to the science at all. You seem pretty clued in. Clue me in.
So how many pirated copies = 1 lost sale?
One military offender. Military courts do not judge civilians, and civilians are not affected by military laws.
Is what you said true? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex_parte_Quirin
The defendant's targets were economic targets, not military. The target was on domestic soil. The Supreme Court decision was that military tribunal was the appropriate mechanism to try them. In summary, not a military target, on domestic soil, defendants were also not military according to the details of the case.
The majority of casualties were civilian.
How many dead officers is required to warrant a military trial?
It's a story about a system that doesn't verify data sent to them.
It's even worse in the courts. Apple fanboys everywhere sitting on all those judicial benches.
I shake my angry fist at you Apple fanboys judges!
The BSD license which applies to said BSD kernel permits profiting explicitly.
If you don't like what you're getting paid, why do you show up to work for half what you think you're worth? That's pretty stupid.
The American worker.
http://callmehussein.blogspot.com/ ?
You don't need an Attorney General to oppose something. As president, Obama has the power to say "We will not do warrantless wiretapping. Period."
What's the point of winning if we can't get a candidate who agrees with us on everything? How far do we have to negotiate away the things we believe in until we're officially losing?
Let me try to explain to people who don't run companies real quickly why Objective-C is really appealing to apple by asking several questions.
Who drives the Objective-C language spec? Who drives the Objective-C runtime? Who does Apple need to ask permissions from to make modifications to the language or runtime? Ok then.
Let's pretend for a moment Apple decides to switch to Java. Who drives the Java language spec? Who drives the Java runtimes? Who would apple need to ask permissions from to make modifications to the language or runtime?
We good now? I'm pretty sure, being a business, Apple banks on business expediency over developer enthusiasm.
Have you actually used an iPhone? Have you noticed the distinctive lack of a menu?
If I copy text, does it copy attributes? Does bold text retains its boldness? Etc.
What happens when I want to copy an email address from the address book? Am I limited to copying read-only text or read-write text? Why can't I copy a whole address book entry? What happens when I paste the address book entry?
Snow Leopard's implementation of B isn't a freebie. You're still going to have to recognize where parallelization could happen and rewrite that part of the algorithm to be functional in nature. The run time isn't going to figure out what can be made parallel and do it for you from your existing code. In fact, you'll have to use a whole new construct to make it possible.