It's 5x more work and once the 1% lose everything, it generally takes 100 years for a new 1% to become so arrogant again.
Actually, it's on the order of 200 years (no, I don't remember where I read that). Not that I'm saying you don't get crises in between (and different parts of the world may well be moving at different phases of the cycle). Still, go back around 200 years and you get a very forthright approach to dealing with an unacceptable elite: the French revolutionary one. Now, I don't advocate a general massacre of the 1%; I fear such a thing, as I've no idea at all whether I'd gain from the ensuing upheaval. But my real fear is that the 1% doesn't bear in mind that they really can lose absolutely everything, including their lives and the livelihoods of everyone they care for; I suspect that they believe themselves untouchable, and I suspect that's one of the major things that fuels widespread revolt.
We're sliding towards the abyss and too many people want it to happen. Shit.
This ignorant tool right here hates the tea party so much that he has invented a fantasy world where Romney was cow-towing to the tea-party.
Mittens did enough that they didn't oppose him, but was put in a position where he couldn't attract enough non-aligned voters (the Dems have some demographic advantages there for a whole host of reasons, many of which are linked to Republican policies over the past few decades). OTOH, the effect of the tea party faction appears to be stronger in the process of selection of congressmen, where it has had the effect of producing a cadre of extremists who appear totally unable to compromise at all. Since making government work at all always requires compromise, the rest is really unsurprising.
Let's be clear, the Dems have their own extremists. The difference? They're not running the show; the party lets them yap, but doesn't let them control the candidate selection process. The only thing propping the Republicans up at national level right now are the placements of boundaries between districts, and there's been a lot of accusation of gerrymandering there; it's notable because the un-gerrymander-able boundaries of the states lead to clear Democrat advantage.
The problem the Republicans have is that an extremists response to failure tends to be to insist on more extremism, on more purity, while trying to force out anyone who might oppose them. This can lock the whole party into a vicious cycle and may take a generation to shake. (There was an equivalent problem in the UK with the Labour party through the late 1970s and early 1980s, except that was left-wing extremists, and it forced the party out of power for 18 years.)
I hope the Republicans get their shit together and behave like adults once again soon, even though I have never been fond of their political positions.
I also have a proposal to fix this. Use a megaphone to announce, as loudly as possible, to every Republican party member that they suck because they couldn't manage to stop the infighting for long enough to pick a candidate that enough people outside the party could truly stomach. Do this repeatedly (though try to avoid getting punched in the face, OK?) until they are annoyed enough to actually mend their ways.
While who a party chooses should always be that party's own business, they need to be aware that picking a shitty candidate always runs the risk of losing the election. The majority of the population never ever cared for ideological purity; it is actually one of the most repulsive things to Joe Average. They also hate being insulted. Want to win? Get smart!
(Advice also applies to Democrats, of course, except they didn't fuck the election campaign up and they kept the worst of their loons mostly under control. Important difference!)
the crucial issue is what's strategically best for the long term interests of free software
It's only crucial to some people (with yourself being obviously one of them). Others don't care nearly so much. If it's a BSD license, an attempt by someone to wall off the code would just result in everyone else forking from the last openly available version. Or it dying if nobody else actually cares, but in that case it doesn't matter. (If users care but no developers do, it's going to be hard to keep the thing alive whatever the license is.) Bear in mind that one of the few things that the BSD license prohibits is relicensing under different terms; for that, you always need the permission of the copyright holders, and there's no provision at all for retrospectively changing the license. But you knew that last part anyway, yes?
BSD-style projects tend to prefer to keep the openness guaranteed through just social measures, instead of trying to enforce it via the license. I guess it might be thought of as a political difference, I suppose.
It should probably also be offset by how many lines of code there are in language X.
Why? That just skews against more verbose languages. It should be possible to write non-trivial projects without any WTFy-ness at all. If your language can't, that's a really good indication that it is the wrong tool.
Well, they DID account for it, but they did it all wrong. They counted WTFs *per repository*...but that makes the assumption that all repositories are of equal size, which they are not. If C++ repositories have more code on average, then that simple fact could account for the increased WTFs per repository, even if everything else was equal.
The number of WTFs per project isn't a good metric to have a high score in, you know.
It's worth mentioning that House and Senate representatives and President - and perhaps at least some of their staff - are considered "essential" and will get paid through the shut down.
Only the House and Senate think they're essential.
Figuring out the grand design of a complex idea can leave beginners like me paralysed, I can understand and value concepts like modularity but on their own it just feels vague when trying to come up with a design from little experience.
It's like eating an elephant: take one bite at a time. Pick a little bit that you think you can tackle and have a go at it. Then take on another bit. And another. Don't be afraid to go back and redo if you find out you're wrong; everyone's wrong sometimes, you've just got to try again.
>Kids don't default to wild inattentive hoodlums, it's learned behavior like anything else.
You obviously have only one child.
That's attention-seeking. Kids are good at learning to do more extreme things in order to actually get someone to pay attention to their needs and desires as opposed to someone else's.
Sandy was not a "major hurricane"; it did a lot of damage because of where it hit, but it was still only Category 1 in strength.
What does the real damage is the storm surge, which Sandy had a lot of (for a whole load of reasons) and which the Saffir-Simpson scale does not measure. Sure, it might correlate with surface displacement in the open ocean, but stuff gets a whole lot more complicated at the coast. In particular, the shape of the seabed and the coastline becomes incredibly significant; you get funnelling effects. The upshot? Huge devastation. Not helped by a lot of unwisely-placed development, but even so.
With all the public money sloshing around in various climate change-related sectors like renewable energy, carbon emission credits, public transportation, and climate change reparations, there's plenty with which to bribe various insurance entities.
Whereas big oil and big coal have no money at all and therefore are known to bribe nobody at all ever.
Only when assuming a free and functioning economy with no collusion between insurance companies.
Any DA proving (and busting) such an illegal collusion will gain a lot of fame and glory, and will be destined for great things. The insurers know this.
You are aware that the reinsurers really believe that global warming is coming down the pipe and have already started to adjust their rates accordingly?
Yes, you could do that, but then you'd have to distribute the updated cacerts to all desktops that need to run your app, and keep it updated whenever a new JVM comes out.
That's relatively practical for an intranet, especially one where all the clients are under at least some central control.
I can write that I convolved two functions, but you don't need to see the code that I used to do the convolution.
So you used a standard library for doing the convolution, cited that library correctly, and showed how you called the library? That would be very good academic programming and paper-writing too. Of course, the flip side also holds: if you don't show your methods properly, or don't cite others work that you use or reference, you're a bad academic. If you do it all yourself when much of it isn't your research focus, you're just wasting your time (and encouraging others to ignore you).
We suffer from the fact that IPv4 and IPv6 do not have store and forward. Instead of / in addition to endpoint IDs, all the routers need to have a large cache for versioned content.
No. You have no idea what you are asking for. There's far more to internet traffic than sending documents around. Let any caches be handled as a separate service, not as part of the basic message routing.
If Firefox/IE aren't rendering a page and WebKit is, it's almost always because the page author has written WebKit-specific code (e.g. used -webkit CSS prefixes on properties that are supported without a prefix in other browsers).
The problem isn't using browser-specific extensions. The problem is that the page doesn't work without them. What's really wanted is a way to tell a browser to disable all vendor-specific extensions and to have everything be according to standard (or disabled) so that authors can check their stuff ahead of time.
Nor is legal or accounting or HR or custodial services or strategic planning. Yet if you don't put some outlay into all these things, there's a real chance of the company not making any profit at all before long. IT (including telecommunications) is an essential service; if nobody can communicate with anyone else except by going and talking to them in person, not much gets done at all and many other functions become hugely more expensive. Another thing that IT does is preserve essential business information; that used to be done by a whole separate department (Records) which was remarkably expensive, and IT saved a lot there. (Alas, what then happened is that everyone decided to demand that many more records actually be kept as the cost-per-record was so much lower.)
But if the business wants to outsource IT, that's what they'll do. It'll end in tears, but there's little you can do to prevent hell-bent stupidity when the person in charge of doing it has decided that outsourcing is the only way he'll make his bonus this year. (After that? He'll be a successful "expert" in "successful" outsourcing working to repeat the experience elsewhere.)
Slashdot Mirror
It's 5x more work and once the 1% lose everything, it generally takes 100 years for a new 1% to become so arrogant again.
Actually, it's on the order of 200 years (no, I don't remember where I read that). Not that I'm saying you don't get crises in between (and different parts of the world may well be moving at different phases of the cycle). Still, go back around 200 years and you get a very forthright approach to dealing with an unacceptable elite: the French revolutionary one. Now, I don't advocate a general massacre of the 1%; I fear such a thing, as I've no idea at all whether I'd gain from the ensuing upheaval. But my real fear is that the 1% doesn't bear in mind that they really can lose absolutely everything, including their lives and the livelihoods of everyone they care for; I suspect that they believe themselves untouchable, and I suspect that's one of the major things that fuels widespread revolt.
We're sliding towards the abyss and too many people want it to happen. Shit.
This ignorant tool right here hates the tea party so much that he has invented a fantasy world where Romney was cow-towing to the tea-party.
Mittens did enough that they didn't oppose him, but was put in a position where he couldn't attract enough non-aligned voters (the Dems have some demographic advantages there for a whole host of reasons, many of which are linked to Republican policies over the past few decades). OTOH, the effect of the tea party faction appears to be stronger in the process of selection of congressmen, where it has had the effect of producing a cadre of extremists who appear totally unable to compromise at all. Since making government work at all always requires compromise, the rest is really unsurprising.
Let's be clear, the Dems have their own extremists. The difference? They're not running the show; the party lets them yap, but doesn't let them control the candidate selection process. The only thing propping the Republicans up at national level right now are the placements of boundaries between districts, and there's been a lot of accusation of gerrymandering there; it's notable because the un-gerrymander-able boundaries of the states lead to clear Democrat advantage.
The problem the Republicans have is that an extremists response to failure tends to be to insist on more extremism, on more purity, while trying to force out anyone who might oppose them. This can lock the whole party into a vicious cycle and may take a generation to shake. (There was an equivalent problem in the UK with the Labour party through the late 1970s and early 1980s, except that was left-wing extremists, and it forced the party out of power for 18 years.)
I hope the Republicans get their shit together and behave like adults once again soon, even though I have never been fond of their political positions.
I have a proposal to fix this.
I also have a proposal to fix this. Use a megaphone to announce, as loudly as possible, to every Republican party member that they suck because they couldn't manage to stop the infighting for long enough to pick a candidate that enough people outside the party could truly stomach. Do this repeatedly (though try to avoid getting punched in the face, OK?) until they are annoyed enough to actually mend their ways.
While who a party chooses should always be that party's own business, they need to be aware that picking a shitty candidate always runs the risk of losing the election. The majority of the population never ever cared for ideological purity; it is actually one of the most repulsive things to Joe Average. They also hate being insulted. Want to win? Get smart!
(Advice also applies to Democrats, of course, except they didn't fuck the election campaign up and they kept the worst of their loons mostly under control. Important difference!)
but like someone already commented they have half-life already covered for a game related use.
With trademarks, it helps to be very specific. In particular, it makes the unique mark far easier to defend in a civil court case.
the crucial issue is what's strategically best for the long term interests of free software
It's only crucial to some people (with yourself being obviously one of them). Others don't care nearly so much. If it's a BSD license, an attempt by someone to wall off the code would just result in everyone else forking from the last openly available version. Or it dying if nobody else actually cares, but in that case it doesn't matter. (If users care but no developers do, it's going to be hard to keep the thing alive whatever the license is.) Bear in mind that one of the few things that the BSD license prohibits is relicensing under different terms; for that, you always need the permission of the copyright holders, and there's no provision at all for retrospectively changing the license. But you knew that last part anyway, yes?
BSD-style projects tend to prefer to keep the openness guaranteed through just social measures, instead of trying to enforce it via the license. I guess it might be thought of as a political difference, I suppose.
It should probably also be offset by how many lines of code there are in language X.
Why? That just skews against more verbose languages. It should be possible to write non-trivial projects without any WTFy-ness at all. If your language can't, that's a really good indication that it is the wrong tool.
Well, they DID account for it, but they did it all wrong. They counted WTFs *per repository* ...but that makes the assumption that all repositories are of equal size, which they are not. If C++ repositories have more code on average, then that simple fact could account for the increased WTFs per repository, even if everything else was equal.
The number of WTFs per project isn't a good metric to have a high score in, you know.
comes pre-loaded with chair throwing app!
Angry Chairs?
It's worth mentioning that House and Senate representatives and President - and perhaps at least some of their staff - are considered "essential" and will get paid through the shut down.
Only the House and Senate think they're essential.
Having a 30w laptop plugged into a 120w brick shouldn't damage the laptop, it just means the power brick won't be running at full power.
FTFY. (It's often the case that not running at full power allows a device to be more efficient.)
Adding a second port would likely take away from space used for battery and would reduce charge time.
But at least you'll be able to find a charger no problem!
NIST should NEVER be trusted again.
You need to put your effort into encrypting things with triple ROT-13 encryption. The NSA have never put any effort at all into trying to break that!
Figuring out the grand design of a complex idea can leave beginners like me paralysed, I can understand and value concepts like modularity but on their own it just feels vague when trying to come up with a design from little experience.
It's like eating an elephant: take one bite at a time. Pick a little bit that you think you can tackle and have a go at it. Then take on another bit. And another. Don't be afraid to go back and redo if you find out you're wrong; everyone's wrong sometimes, you've just got to try again.
>Kids don't default to wild inattentive hoodlums, it's learned behavior like anything else.
You obviously have only one child.
That's attention-seeking. Kids are good at learning to do more extreme things in order to actually get someone to pay attention to their needs and desires as opposed to someone else's.
Sandy was not a "major hurricane"; it did a lot of damage because of where it hit, but it was still only Category 1 in strength.
What does the real damage is the storm surge, which Sandy had a lot of (for a whole load of reasons) and which the Saffir-Simpson scale does not measure. Sure, it might correlate with surface displacement in the open ocean, but stuff gets a whole lot more complicated at the coast. In particular, the shape of the seabed and the coastline becomes incredibly significant; you get funnelling effects. The upshot? Huge devastation. Not helped by a lot of unwisely-placed development, but even so.
Tilt at another windmill please.
With all the public money sloshing around in various climate change-related sectors like renewable energy, carbon emission credits, public transportation, and climate change reparations, there's plenty with which to bribe various insurance entities.
Whereas big oil and big coal have no money at all and therefore are known to bribe nobody at all ever.
Give me a break, fool!
Only when assuming a free and functioning economy with no collusion between insurance companies.
Any DA proving (and busting) such an illegal collusion will gain a lot of fame and glory, and will be destined for great things. The insurers know this.
You are aware how reinsurance works, right?
You are aware that the reinsurers really believe that global warming is coming down the pipe and have already started to adjust their rates accordingly?
That's like saying the US Tax code is good bed-time reading.
Nobody who reads the US Tax Code in bed has problems sleeping...
Yes, you could do that, but then you'd have to distribute the updated cacerts to all desktops that need to run your app, and keep it updated whenever a new JVM comes out.
That's relatively practical for an intranet, especially one where all the clients are under at least some central control.
I can write that I convolved two functions, but you don't need to see the code that I used to do the convolution.
So you used a standard library for doing the convolution, cited that library correctly, and showed how you called the library? That would be very good academic programming and paper-writing too. Of course, the flip side also holds: if you don't show your methods properly, or don't cite others work that you use or reference, you're a bad academic. If you do it all yourself when much of it isn't your research focus, you're just wasting your time (and encouraging others to ignore you).
We suffer from the fact that IPv4 and IPv6 do not have store and forward. Instead of / in addition to endpoint IDs, all the routers need to have a large cache for versioned content.
No. You have no idea what you are asking for. There's far more to internet traffic than sending documents around. Let any caches be handled as a separate service, not as part of the basic message routing.
If Firefox/IE aren't rendering a page and WebKit is, it's almost always because the page author has written WebKit-specific code (e.g. used -webkit CSS prefixes on properties that are supported without a prefix in other browsers).
The problem isn't using browser-specific extensions. The problem is that the page doesn't work without them. What's really wanted is a way to tell a browser to disable all vendor-specific extensions and to have everything be according to standard (or disabled) so that authors can check their stuff ahead of time.
Checking stuff ahead of time? Hah! I can dream...
Right now you would be hard pressed to go to ordinary hardware or grocery stores and find anything actually made in America.
That's not true, and you know it. Nobody else makes Cheese in the same way that America does.
IT is not a revenue generator.
Nor is legal or accounting or HR or custodial services or strategic planning. Yet if you don't put some outlay into all these things, there's a real chance of the company not making any profit at all before long. IT (including telecommunications) is an essential service; if nobody can communicate with anyone else except by going and talking to them in person, not much gets done at all and many other functions become hugely more expensive. Another thing that IT does is preserve essential business information; that used to be done by a whole separate department (Records) which was remarkably expensive, and IT saved a lot there. (Alas, what then happened is that everyone decided to demand that many more records actually be kept as the cost-per-record was so much lower.)
But if the business wants to outsource IT, that's what they'll do. It'll end in tears, but there's little you can do to prevent hell-bent stupidity when the person in charge of doing it has decided that outsourcing is the only way he'll make his bonus this year. (After that? He'll be a successful "expert" in "successful" outsourcing working to repeat the experience elsewhere.)