For how much would you buy an apple? You might pay $1. You might pay $1M, if it's the last apple on the planet. But no matter what, you woulnd't pay two apples.
Same way, bringing oil from asteroids will cost a lot more in oil than it will bring. So at some point, oil ceases being an energy source and becomes an energy store perhaps.
Astrology is about understanding natural cycles, in particular the ways in which the cycles of planets and stars synchronize with the cycles of individual and collective human events. It is not about absolute claims of prediction based on absolute alignments. Newspaper horoscopes are, on the whole, a fraud, and not consistent with the true intention and purpose of astrology.
Please explain this part. Especially what kind of understanding it brings, and how the synchronization thing works.
Also what predictions are made? Give a few examples
The bad alloy is distinct enough from the good one to tell at a glance from a low res photo.
And it even seems that they had records of the unusual appearance. So the materials came in, somebody noticed and documented that this batch looked funny, but nobody thought to investigate if they might have got something other than what was specified?
To people like myself, music is a pleasant background to block the noise of the underground and the background chatter at work. I very ocassionally listen to music for the sake of listening, but it's not important enough to me to spend a large amount of money on the equipment. I own a pretty nice pair of headphones and that's it.
I think it's largely unnecessary, and often a sign of bad design.
Unnecessary because so far I've not seen that much of a need for it. It might make things a bit prettier looking by avoiding the need for a set of functions along the lines of atoi/atof/atol/atoll but in my experience that kind of thing doesn't come up often enough for me to even remember I can do type based overloading.
Bad design because if you have Frob(Foo) and Frob(Bar), then there are excellent chances that Foo and Bar should inherit from a common class, or implement an interface. Or perhaps Frob should be a method of those classes.
For code reading though, I think it's less of a problem than operator overloading you obviously see that something called Frob() is getting called. And if you want to read the code for Frob the IDE will either take you to the right version of it, or show that there are multiple versions.
I'm perfectly willing to discuss the US' flaws, but only with people who consider things like random killing *bad*. Yes, EVEN when it's "for the people", "for social justice" or "for freedom". People who are less-than-confused about whether it was Saddam or Bush who killed more. People who realize that someone who fired poison gas rockets, then was found "without WMDs", is not innocent, but merely has hidden his weapons well. For everyone else, the US *IS* perfect.
Here's the way I see it:
1. Saddam was in no way a nice guy 2. The US is not the world police, nor should be. Somebody being a dictator isn't an automatic justification for invasion 3. IMO, the right thing to do would have been to leave Saddam alone, and let the country have a revolution if the citizens decide to have one. 4. Regardless which one was the most evil, the Iraq war didn't result in anything positive, so starting it was a mistake.
Third reason: a large amount of what I do is maintenance. So when reading code it's very important for me to clearly see "something happens here". If I see a doSomething(), that's obvious. Overloading can muddle the issue. Add templates and whether it's an object or not will depend on what the template gets used on.
The thing about operator overloading is more about code reading than the internals of what gets generated.
In C, when you come across "a = b + c;" you know perfectly fine what's going on. Sure it might not generate exactly that in assembly, but what the code is actually doing is perfectly clear.
In C++ though any arbitrary amount of weirdness can happen if there's overloading, including things like memory allocation, file I/O, database or network access, if the overloaded operator does it for some reason. So you have to be paranoid and check the class definition just in case. It's a function call masquerading as an operator, and that can lead to a lot of confusion.
1. People who aren't networking engineers don't know about QoS, or don't know/want to know how to configure it. 2. QoS used that way is a hack to work around an issue that doesn't have to be there in the first place 3. How do you determine the maximum throughput? It's not necessarily the official line's speed. The nice thing about TCP is that it's supposed to figure out on its own how much bandwidth there is. You're proposing a regression to having to tell the system by hand. 4. QoS is most effective on stuff you're sending, but in the current consumer-oriented internet most people download a lot more than they upload.
Just what do you think happens when they digest that tuna?
It gets broken up into components in the stomach, in the intestine anything that can be (including the mercury) gets absorbed into the bloodstream, then any remaining waste gets discarded.
One thing that confuses me: why does anybody care about the Mayan calendar?
I mean, it's a calendar from a dead culture. It has no validity for non-believers, and for religious people, wouldn't it be heretical to take it seriously?
What's happening is that the way graphics work in Linux is being completely overhauled. This isn't a "now the do_stuff() function takes an extra argument" kind of change, it's a complete redesign. A stable ABI would prevent the former, but redesigns like this one would still happen. You can't use the Windows 3.1 drivers on Win7 for instance.
This is more of an issue of bad timing, with hardware arriving before the software is ready. A bit like XP having a lot of trouble to install on systems with SATA drives (at least initially)
And sadly, I looked at the future Google wants, the one that Apple wants, the one Oracle will stumble into, and the one MSFT wants. The MSFT one is the most open with the most changes for other people to succeed. (This assumes IBM and Red Hat continue to keep selling Oracle's Java and so will merge with it eventually).
The way I read it: MS crap stinks less than Apple, Google and Oracle crap. But crap is still crap, and I'd rather not have any kind of it.
Amazing discovery: PJ is actually human! Stop the presses!
Well, duh. Of course she had to have some motivation. Do you think people 100% coldly and rationally decide to dedicate so much of their time to a purpose they are completely disengaged from?
I don't really care about her motivation. She either provides a good service to the community or doesn't, regardless of whether she's doing it out of anger, love for the cause, or some robotic need to analyze things in a 100% logical manner.
You seem to have missed a crucial problem in there though: That the way he's doing that is by getting foreign countries to keep up economic sanctions that the people that are on his side hate. And he knows that, so he pretends to hate them as well.
It's an interesting kind of support he's getting. It's not money, or food, or weapons. No, what he's asking is "please screw the people I represent harder so that they will pressure Mugabe". I don't know you, but to me it doesn't make him look good at all. He's greatly damaging his country's economy and wellbeing to use this people as a weapon against his opponent.
Well this other guy doesn't seem all that great to me either.
You realize that he's using the people he's supposed to represent as a weapon to attack his opponent by hiddenly supporting something his people really hate?
Translated to US politics: Imagine that during Obama's campaign he was hiddenly supporting the reverse of what he advocated. That while proclaiming wanting to end the war and close Guantanamo, he was actually hiddenly supporting those things because it'd help making Bush look bad.
Depends on what means. For instance, just having one tyrant replace another strikes me as suboptimal.
But there's another thing here. I think that achieving democracy by means the people disapprove of is a very bad idea. If the people overwhelmingly say "off with the tyrant's head", then as undemocratic as that might be, getting democracy in place by such means might well work out alright.
But imagine that this was found out after he kicked out Mugabe. Can you imagine anything good coming out of it? If it's important enough that it gives Mugabe an advantage, I doubt anything very good would happen.
Unfortunately, Zimbabwe is only a democracy on paper. In reality, it's a dictatorship. Tsvangirai was a reformer trying to bring democracy to reality. And now that this information has been leaked, he'll be killed by Mugabe
In that case, why does he need a reason at all?
And no, it won't be "the people" kicking his ass. It will be the dictator putting a bullet in his head.
The way I'm reading it, it all hinges on "deeply unpopular with Zimbabweans" part. Because the leak isn't that Tsvangirai was doing something Mugabe hates, it's that he's doing something the citizens hate, and that gives Mugabe ammunition.
If that gives Mugabe that much of an advantage, something is deeply wrong with the people to start with.
Seriously, you apologists baffle me. Why can't you just admit that wikileaks, to put it succinctly, fucked up?
Because I don't think they have?
I don't have this simplistic idea of that democracy automatically fixes everything and must be installed everywhere by any means possible. Democracy is awesome, but people must actually want it. Otherwise, well, just look at Iraq to see how well that goes.
Besides, isn't this democracy in action? Tsvangirai adopted a position that his country considers very unpopular. The people seem to be responding by kicking his ass. Democracy!
Tell me, what would you think if it turned out that Bush or Obama (or whoever you prefer) got elected due to a deal like that? Are you really okay with your side winning by using any dirty tricks and subterfuge available to it?
Slashdot Mirror
Physics plays a very fundamental part:
For how much would you buy an apple? You might pay $1. You might pay $1M, if it's the last apple on the planet. But no matter what, you woulnd't pay two apples.
Same way, bringing oil from asteroids will cost a lot more in oil than it will bring. So at some point, oil ceases being an energy source and becomes an energy store perhaps.
Well, here's something that contradicts all those who claims that Wikileaks is running on some sort of anti-US plot.
Something tells me that I can expect those people who claimed such things to suddenly become silent and pretend they never said it, though.
Please explain this part. Especially what kind of understanding it brings, and how the synchronization thing works.
Also what predictions are made? Give a few examples
The bad alloy is distinct enough from the good one to tell at a glance from a low res photo.
And it even seems that they had records of the unusual appearance. So the materials came in, somebody noticed and documented that this batch looked funny, but nobody thought to investigate if they might have got something other than what was specified?
A lot of people simply don't give a damn.
To people like myself, music is a pleasant background to block the noise of the underground and the background chatter at work. I very ocassionally listen to music for the sake of listening, but it's not important enough to me to spend a large amount of money on the equipment. I own a pretty nice pair of headphones and that's it.
I think it's largely unnecessary, and often a sign of bad design.
Unnecessary because so far I've not seen that much of a need for it. It might make things a bit prettier looking by avoiding the need for a set of functions along the lines of atoi/atof/atol/atoll but in my experience that kind of thing doesn't come up often enough for me to even remember I can do type based overloading.
Bad design because if you have Frob(Foo) and Frob(Bar), then there are excellent chances that Foo and Bar should inherit from a common class, or implement an interface. Or perhaps Frob should be a method of those classes.
For code reading though, I think it's less of a problem than operator overloading you obviously see that something called Frob() is getting called. And if you want to read the code for Frob the IDE will either take you to the right version of it, or show that there are multiple versions.
Here's the way I see it:
1. Saddam was in no way a nice guy
2. The US is not the world police, nor should be. Somebody being a dictator isn't an automatic justification for invasion
3. IMO, the right thing to do would have been to leave Saddam alone, and let the country have a revolution if the citizens decide to have one.
4. Regardless which one was the most evil, the Iraq war didn't result in anything positive, so starting it was a mistake.
Third reason: a large amount of what I do is maintenance. So when reading code it's very important for me to clearly see "something happens here". If I see a doSomething(), that's obvious. Overloading can muddle the issue. Add templates and whether it's an object or not will depend on what the template gets used on.
The thing about operator overloading is more about code reading than the internals of what gets generated.
In C, when you come across "a = b + c;" you know perfectly fine what's going on. Sure it might not generate exactly that in assembly, but what the code is actually doing is perfectly clear.
In C++ though any arbitrary amount of weirdness can happen if there's overloading, including things like memory allocation, file I/O, database or network access, if the overloaded operator does it for some reason. So you have to be paranoid and check the class definition just in case. It's a function call masquerading as an operator, and that can lead to a lot of confusion.
Will do. All my cards have been nvidia so far. Will be ATI from now on.
Several issues:
1. People who aren't networking engineers don't know about QoS, or don't know/want to know how to configure it.
2. QoS used that way is a hack to work around an issue that doesn't have to be there in the first place
3. How do you determine the maximum throughput? It's not necessarily the official line's speed. The nice thing about TCP is that it's supposed to figure out on its own how much bandwidth there is. You're proposing a regression to having to tell the system by hand.
4. QoS is most effective on stuff you're sending, but in the current consumer-oriented internet most people download a lot more than they upload.
Just what do you think happens when they digest that tuna?
It gets broken up into components in the stomach, in the intestine anything that can be (including the mercury) gets absorbed into the bloodstream, then any remaining waste gets discarded.
One thing that confuses me: why does anybody care about the Mayan calendar?
I mean, it's a calendar from a dead culture. It has no validity for non-believers, and for religious people, wouldn't it be heretical to take it seriously?
It's not about the ABI.
What's happening is that the way graphics work in Linux is being completely overhauled. This isn't a "now the do_stuff() function takes an extra argument" kind of change, it's a complete redesign. A stable ABI would prevent the former, but redesigns like this one would still happen. You can't use the Windows 3.1 drivers on Win7 for instance.
This is more of an issue of bad timing, with hardware arriving before the software is ready. A bit like XP having a lot of trouble to install on systems with SATA drives (at least initially)
The way I read it: MS crap stinks less than Apple, Google and Oracle crap. But crap is still crap, and I'd rather not have any kind of it.
Amazing discovery: PJ is actually human! Stop the presses!
Well, duh. Of course she had to have some motivation. Do you think people 100% coldly and rationally decide to dedicate so much of their time to a purpose they are completely disengaged from?
I don't really care about her motivation. She either provides a good service to the community or doesn't, regardless of whether she's doing it out of anger, love for the cause, or some robotic need to analyze things in a 100% logical manner.
I might want to buy an ebook fairly soon. Can anybody recommend a good ebook reader where this kind of crap isn't possible?
I'd like: no DRM, standard USB connector, possibility of uploading anything I want from USB, and open source firmware.
You seem to have missed a crucial problem in there though: That the way he's doing that is by getting foreign countries to keep up economic sanctions that the people that are on his side hate. And he knows that, so he pretends to hate them as well.
It's an interesting kind of support he's getting. It's not money, or food, or weapons. No, what he's asking is "please screw the people I represent harder so that they will pressure Mugabe". I don't know you, but to me it doesn't make him look good at all. He's greatly damaging his country's economy and wellbeing to use this people as a weapon against his opponent.
Well this other guy doesn't seem all that great to me either.
You realize that he's using the people he's supposed to represent as a weapon to attack his opponent by hiddenly supporting something his people really hate?
Translated to US politics: Imagine that during Obama's campaign he was hiddenly supporting the reverse of what he advocated. That while proclaiming wanting to end the war and close Guantanamo, he was actually hiddenly supporting those things because it'd help making Bush look bad.
Depends on what means. For instance, just having one tyrant replace another strikes me as suboptimal.
But there's another thing here. I think that achieving democracy by means the people disapprove of is a very bad idea. If the people overwhelmingly say "off with the tyrant's head", then as undemocratic as that might be, getting democracy in place by such means might well work out alright.
But imagine that this was found out after he kicked out Mugabe. Can you imagine anything good coming out of it? If it's important enough that it gives Mugabe an advantage, I doubt anything very good would happen.
I stand corrected.
But if they do proceed to do that as he says, wouldn't they be getting what they ask for?
In that case, why does he need a reason at all?
The way I'm reading it, it all hinges on "deeply unpopular with Zimbabweans" part. Because the leak isn't that Tsvangirai was doing something Mugabe hates, it's that he's doing something the citizens hate, and that gives Mugabe ammunition.
If that gives Mugabe that much of an advantage, something is deeply wrong with the people to start with.
Ok, the right we have Mugabe, who threatens people, cheats on elections, leads the country to economic collapse and compares himself to Hitler.
On the left we have Tsvangirai who is awesome apart from the deal with the sanctions.
And the zimbabweans hate the sanctions so much that they'd rather side with the spawn of Satan instead? That just doesn't make much sense to me.
Because I don't think they have?
I don't have this simplistic idea of that democracy automatically fixes everything and must be installed everywhere by any means possible. Democracy is awesome, but people must actually want it. Otherwise, well, just look at Iraq to see how well that goes.
Besides, isn't this democracy in action? Tsvangirai adopted a position that his country considers very unpopular. The people seem to be responding by kicking his ass. Democracy!
Tell me, what would you think if it turned out that Bush or Obama (or whoever you prefer) got elected due to a deal like that? Are you really okay with your side winning by using any dirty tricks and subterfuge available to it?
And now that Saddam is gone, Iraq is enjoying democracy in all its glory? I seem to have missed that happening.