All code is interpreted by something. That something might be hardware, microcode, firmware, a middle layer, or even a whole VM, but all code is interpreted.
Saying code is or is not interpreted is simply where you draw the line. Even "native" code on most processors these is really interpreted by the microcode or something similar.
I think you know exactly what they mean. Human-readable code == bad; byte-code == good.
Your argument boils down to the same sort of definition-shifting, intellectual masturbation as, "But everything humans make is natural because humans are natural," or "There's no such thing as an honest politician because everybody lies sometimes." Everyone knows what "interpreted," "natural," and "honest" actually mean in context, and pettifogging over terms like that adds nothing to any discussion ever.
If this code really is in violation of FCC regulations, shouldn't that invalidate all elections that the code was used in?
Courts are extremely reluctant to order new elections. Elections are very costly and time-consuming and forcing the elected candidate to stand for election again may bias voters against the candidate. Generally, a court is only going to order such a remedy if you (a) have proof of outright fraud that (b) resulted in a change to the results of the election. The mere possibility of affecting the election is not going to be good enough.
In light of that, minor violations of regulations by creating code that actually works but doesn't follow the regs is not going to overturn an election. As a remedy, that's like hitting a fly with a sledgehammer. It may, however, result in the company getting fined, certain employees getting jail time (if the statute provides), and/or in the machines being decertified for future elections.
Wait, which state's administration are you talking about?
Because I hope you do realize that the voting system is largely run by the states with there being limits to what Congress and the FEC can do affect it and that you aren't laying everything at Bush's feet. I mean, he was a terrible President, but it's not like his fingers were in everything.
Which means if the 17th was repealed, Senators would be elected by the State Governments, and the States could use the power of the Senate to kick-around the U.S. government when it tries to abuse its power...... similar to how the UK, France, Germany and other members use their power to kick-around the EU government and keep it restrained.
Example:
California, Washington, and a bunch of other states legalize marijuana for use by doctors. President Dickhead ignores the laws and arrests CA, WA, and other citizens. California and the other states direct their Senators to censure the president and block all of his legislation from passing. He backs down. The States need to have the power to keep the central government from overreaching.
Why am I not surprised that someone who wants the 17th Amendment repealed and who thinks that government obstructionism is good for everyone gives this example. You'd have to be using the aforementioned product to think that putting the senate back in the hands of state politicians is great plan. Have you not witnessed the partisanship, corruption, and/or general idiocy involved in picking replacement for Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton, and Ted Kennedy over the past year? This sort of thing once led to Illinois not having a Senator for two years before the Amendment was passed, for crying out loud. Is that what you want a return to as the normal process for picking Senators?
And if you think in your crazy pro-hemp world that a state is going to block the President on everything just because of pro-pot voters, you're nuts; otherwise, it would be happening right now under the current system because it's voters of those states who both supported pot legalization AND the current people in office. Not to mention that both of those states are blue states and unlikely to think that pot is more important than the President's positions on health care or the economy.
I've read the background articles (but not the featured rebuttal about PulseAudio yet), and I was wondering why OSS was "deprecated" in favor of ALSA and whether (and if not why not) there's a possibility of OSSv4 being put back into the kernel. Anyone know?
They are supposed to be bringing back Dark Sun, but it'd be best to have very low expectations, cause they just want something "gritty".
I can understand if you feel cynical after seeing how FR was treated, but I don't honestly see how you can read that article and just by its own contents imply that the people building the new product don't "get" Dark Sun. It was an incredibly gritty setting.
They're doing low-power test runs. I managed in my brilliance not to notice either that paragraph in the article or the tagline at the end of the summary./hangs head in shame.
I'm interesting in that statement because it suggests that their complaints had some merit. The comment about him being "less than forthcoming" also makes me wonder. I haven't actually read really anything about the case background, so I wonder what those complaints are and whether the magistrate's recognition is one of "bad but not bad enough" or just "true but nothing to feel admonished about."
Anyone got some more info on their claims and the merits behind them?
If a company offers me a product that I want, then I am happy to give them money and they are happy to take it from me.
Personally, if a company offers me a product that I need, then I am happy to give them money for it. If it's merely a product that I want, and if that want is primarily born from the influence of their advertising on me and my peers, then I'm better off without it.
Better not to face temptation than to have to overcome it.
I mean, whether we like it or not, with or without us, the climate will change. We have proof of this from Ant/arctic core samples and other sources that point to prehistoric changes in the Earth's atmosphere. It was warmer during the time of the dinosaurs and colder during the reign of the mammoths.
No one disputes this -- at least not on the side of people who accept the reality of anthropogenic climate change. The important difference is that the changes you list took VERY long times to happen; even so, many species couldn't adapt.
Maybe it's time to start testing those orbital solar reflectors or beefing up our Near Earth Asteroid Tracking efforts?
Maybe it would be actually much cheaper to change things on the ground rather than to attempt a MASSIVE orbital engineering project. You think it's a bitch getting modern industrial societies to pay to save energy and switch generation sources? Imagine trying to fund a project to put a structure large enough to shade the Earth in a stable position between us and the Sun (i.e. the L1 point).
You want to keep the seat of leadership where you have some hope of seeing a benefit. (Consider Bentonville, AR.) They can move anywhere, anytime they want to. And they have the fiduciary responsibility to do so, or will be sued into oblivion by their own shareholders.
Such a case would probably be a complete non-starter. Read up on the business judgment rule. Courts do not like to put businessmen in fear of having their every action be grounds for a potential lawsuit by shareholders who disagree. (IANAL.)
Personally, I'm just happy to see the change because it means no more putting blue in between yellow and green. That always bugged me, as a slightly OCD person who used to sort things in rainbow order, from crayons to the Skittles I was eating.
Just taking the wacky green agenda to its extreme boundary.
You shouldn't tarnish the entire environmental movement with the beliefs of somehow with a sadly poor of a science education as this guy anymore than you can tarnish the entire tax resistance movement with the beliefs of the birther loonies.
the word itself discounts your theory. Nazi means national socialist party and socialism is almost entirely based on Marx' works which clearly describe many bad things that you must do to become socialist.(the Nazis discriminated/culled by race instead of class which is what labeled them as not true socialists but the soviet union was very very close and maybe the only true Marxist government, and it was evil. the soviets killed more Ukrainians than the Nazis did Jews!)
Uhhh... what.
First of all, I'd love to hear exactly where Marx's works "clearly describe many bad things that you must do to become socialist." I'm pretty sure that killing people is no where in the Communist Manifesto or any of his other works. If that's not the case, then I invite you to provide a citation -- not some other loony's rantings but to actual documents written by Karl Marx.
Though, I seriously doubt you've ever read any of his work -- or even a good summary of his work -- if you think that socialism as he advocated has anything to do with the racial policies of Nazi Germany. No more than Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations" had to do with us torturing Arabs in Guantanimo Bay.
Socialism is about a society ruled by the working class, with all capital used in production owned by the workers who used it instead of a separate investor class. It has egalitarian distribution of resources as a goal. That's it. That's socialism in it's entirety. (Communism in contrast had the goal of a classless society through state ownership of property.) Read up on it.
Also, the Nazis were a fascist party which won votes as an alternative to the democratic and communistic parties taking hold in the Weimar Republic. If you knew anything about the Nazis other than their name, you'd know that they accused both laissez-faire capitalism and communism of both being failed ideologies. The Nazis explicitly sought to preserve the middle class instead of to purely side with the poorer working class. It was a nationalist party first, and "socialist" party purely as a matter of propoganda to sell it to the public.
If you really think the Nazis were socialist, you need to read up on the 1934 Charter of Labor. It set up a system in which the entrepreneur made all the decisions for a company, and the workers owed him a duty of faithfulness. (Companies did have advisory boards where workers could advise the owner of a factory, and the state could outright replace them, so it's not a particularly free-market system either.)
As for the Holodomor in Ukraine, well, not much to say there. That was what happens when people put ideology above common sense and human decency. China's Great Leap Forward was another fine example of that. Our own history on slavery, child labor, and murderous strike breaking shows examples where putting capitalism over human decency led to horrors as well, so I'm not sure exactly why we should consider one philosophy more or less dangerous than the other. Anyway, I think I've wasted too much time recapping world history and to a crazy, grossly ignorant AC, but...
Oh, and the heart monitors in many school districts have a USB port and can be uploaded to a program on the teachers desktop to monitor a child's progress. take just one more step and have that data put in the students transcript and this isn't such a far fetched concern.
Except they'd then have to comply with HIPPA and all of its restraints on sharing of medical data. Oh, wait, I forgot -- government regulation is all evil or something. Whatever, let's put aside the legal liabilities involved.
Guess what? When I was a kid, our PE teacher had this radical technology called a clipboard that he used to record all our heart rates. It was just one more step to put that in paper files for each student, and I guess that makes it not a
Why not? Does somehow using profanity make you less likely to live in a world based on facts? Then again, a person probably needs to talk and act like an elitist to live in a world based on fact.
No. It's just a sign of character. It's the whole "eating dirt" and crazy rant based on stereotypes of liberals without of any knowledge about Oregon's actual tax rates that makes you divorced from reality.
(Not that your disdainful, holier-than-thou attitude towards Oregon makes you an elitist apparently.)
This has to be some legalistic crap. Anybody who has ever done so knows that aerobic exercise feels good. If you're working too hard, you feel breathless. The military have a good way to evaluate this, when they run and sing a cadence.
And yet, as a child, no one told me about this at all. They had me measure my heart rate, but never told me what it was good for, or the fact that I was massively overexerting myself, so the notion that "aerobic exercise feels good" is frankly completely foreign to me. I never learned how to do it right, and I got easily winded whenever I tried.
I only in recent years learned about how you can use your heart rate to better set a proper level of exercise, and I wonder how much better shape I'd be in right now if I had learned at a younger age how to properly exercise before I got into completely sedentary habits. I say more power to the school system for trying these out -- if and only if they use this data to teach kids how to work out.
Slashdot Mirror
All code is interpreted by something. That something might be hardware, microcode, firmware, a middle layer, or even a whole VM, but all code is interpreted.
Saying code is or is not interpreted is simply where you draw the line. Even "native" code on most processors these is really interpreted by the microcode or something similar.
I think you know exactly what they mean. Human-readable code == bad; byte-code == good.
Your argument boils down to the same sort of definition-shifting, intellectual masturbation as, "But everything humans make is natural because humans are natural," or "There's no such thing as an honest politician because everybody lies sometimes." Everyone knows what "interpreted," "natural," and "honest" actually mean in context, and pettifogging over terms like that adds nothing to any discussion ever.
If this code really is in violation of FCC regulations, shouldn't that invalidate all elections that the code was used in?
Courts are extremely reluctant to order new elections. Elections are very costly and time-consuming and forcing the elected candidate to stand for election again may bias voters against the candidate. Generally, a court is only going to order such a remedy if you (a) have proof of outright fraud that (b) resulted in a change to the results of the election. The mere possibility of affecting the election is not going to be good enough.
In light of that, minor violations of regulations by creating code that actually works but doesn't follow the regs is not going to overturn an election. As a remedy, that's like hitting a fly with a sledgehammer. It may, however, result in the company getting fined, certain employees getting jail time (if the statute provides), and/or in the machines being decertified for future elections.
You don't? Even after the last administration?
Wait, which state's administration are you talking about?
Because I hope you do realize that the voting system is largely run by the states with there being limits to what Congress and the FEC can do affect it and that you aren't laying everything at Bush's feet. I mean, he was a terrible President, but it's not like his fingers were in everything.
Which means if the 17th was repealed, Senators would be elected by the State Governments, and the States could use the power of the Senate to kick-around the U.S. government when it tries to abuse its power...... similar to how the UK, France, Germany and other members use their power to kick-around the EU government and keep it restrained.
Example:
California, Washington, and a bunch of other states legalize marijuana for use by doctors. President Dickhead ignores the laws and arrests CA, WA, and other citizens. California and the other states direct their Senators to censure the president and block all of his legislation from passing. He backs down. The States need to have the power to keep the central government from overreaching.
Why am I not surprised that someone who wants the 17th Amendment repealed and who thinks that government obstructionism is good for everyone gives this example. You'd have to be using the aforementioned product to think that putting the senate back in the hands of state politicians is great plan. Have you not witnessed the partisanship, corruption, and/or general idiocy involved in picking replacement for Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton, and Ted Kennedy over the past year? This sort of thing once led to Illinois not having a Senator for two years before the Amendment was passed, for crying out loud. Is that what you want a return to as the normal process for picking Senators?
And if you think in your crazy pro-hemp world that a state is going to block the President on everything just because of pro-pot voters, you're nuts; otherwise, it would be happening right now under the current system because it's voters of those states who both supported pot legalization AND the current people in office. Not to mention that both of those states are blue states and unlikely to think that pot is more important than the President's positions on health care or the economy.
OR they'll roll down the window to make the call, heating up the car in the process, then run the AC on full blast to level it out afterwards.
I know my cell phone conversations come through more clearly when a 55 MPH wind is blowing over me and the phone's mic.
I've read the background articles (but not the featured rebuttal about PulseAudio yet), and I was wondering why OSS was "deprecated" in favor of ALSA and whether (and if not why not) there's a possibility of OSSv4 being put back into the kernel. Anyone know?
They are supposed to be bringing back Dark Sun, but it'd be best to have very low expectations, cause they just want something "gritty".
I can understand if you feel cynical after seeing how FR was treated, but I don't honestly see how you can read that article and just by its own contents imply that the people building the new product don't "get" Dark Sun. It was an incredibly gritty setting.
They're doing low-power test runs. I managed in my brilliance not to notice either that paragraph in the article or the tagline at the end of the summary. /hangs head in shame.
Then why are they spending all the energy to cool the things two months before it's needed?
I don't mean this as a sarcastic comment. I'm genuinely curious.
I'm interesting...
Not as much as you think you are.
Well played, dangitman. Well played.
Informative, obscure, and likely to be missed lower in the comments.
I'm interesting in that statement because it suggests that their complaints had some merit. The comment about him being "less than forthcoming" also makes me wonder. I haven't actually read really anything about the case background, so I wonder what those complaints are and whether the magistrate's recognition is one of "bad but not bad enough" or just "true but nothing to feel admonished about."
Anyone got some more info on their claims and the merits behind them?
brb, jail
No, actually, wait. In retrospect, let's not. I don't think there ARE goggles that can do something for that.
If a company offers me a product that I want, then I am happy to give them money and they are happy to take it from me.
Personally, if a company offers me a product that I need, then I am happy to give them money for it. If it's merely a product that I want, and if that want is primarily born from the influence of their advertising on me and my peers, then I'm better off without it.
Better not to face temptation than to have to overcome it.
I mean, whether we like it or not, with or without us, the climate will change. We have proof of this from Ant/arctic core samples and other sources that point to prehistoric changes in the Earth's atmosphere. It was warmer during the time of the dinosaurs and colder during the reign of the mammoths.
No one disputes this -- at least not on the side of people who accept the reality of anthropogenic climate change. The important difference is that the changes you list took VERY long times to happen; even so, many species couldn't adapt.
Maybe it's time to start testing those orbital solar reflectors or beefing up our Near Earth Asteroid Tracking efforts?
Maybe it would be actually much cheaper to change things on the ground rather than to attempt a MASSIVE orbital engineering project. You think it's a bitch getting modern industrial societies to pay to save energy and switch generation sources? Imagine trying to fund a project to put a structure large enough to shade the Earth in a stable position between us and the Sun (i.e. the L1 point).
So, yeah, no. But it's not like we can do a damn thing about cosmic rays, and it's not like they have much influence on global warming, anyway.
FYI. Cosmic rays have been known to cause bit-flips in RAM.
But the odds are astronomical.
If the ribbon is so intuitive, then I invite you to run a test which I unfortunately ran on myself when under a time deadline:
Sit a first-time user down to use Word and ask them to print their work.
You want to keep the seat of leadership where you have some hope of seeing a benefit. (Consider Bentonville, AR.) They can move anywhere, anytime they want to. And they have the fiduciary responsibility to do so, or will be sued into oblivion by their own shareholders.
Such a case would probably be a complete non-starter. Read up on the business judgment rule. Courts do not like to put businessmen in fear of having their every action be grounds for a potential lawsuit by shareholders who disagree. (IANAL.)
Personally, I'm just happy to see the change because it means no more putting blue in between yellow and green. That always bugged me, as a slightly OCD person who used to sort things in rainbow order, from crayons to the Skittles I was eating.
I believe the procedure is as follows:
1. Get someone to drink before you.
2. Wait for them to die.
Disclaimer: May not work for toxins that take more than 5 days of exposure to kill the subject.
Just taking the wacky green agenda to its extreme boundary.
You shouldn't tarnish the entire environmental movement with the beliefs of somehow with a sadly poor of a science education as this guy anymore than you can tarnish the entire tax resistance movement with the beliefs of the birther loonies.
the word itself discounts your theory. Nazi means national socialist party and socialism is almost entirely based on Marx' works which clearly describe many bad things that you must do to become socialist.(the Nazis discriminated/culled by race instead of class which is what labeled them as not true socialists but the soviet union was very very close and maybe the only true Marxist government, and it was evil. the soviets killed more Ukrainians than the Nazis did Jews!)
Uhhh... what.
First of all, I'd love to hear exactly where Marx's works "clearly describe many bad things that you must do to become socialist." I'm pretty sure that killing people is no where in the Communist Manifesto or any of his other works. If that's not the case, then I invite you to provide a citation -- not some other loony's rantings but to actual documents written by Karl Marx.
Though, I seriously doubt you've ever read any of his work -- or even a good summary of his work -- if you think that socialism as he advocated has anything to do with the racial policies of Nazi Germany. No more than Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations" had to do with us torturing Arabs in Guantanimo Bay.
Socialism is about a society ruled by the working class, with all capital used in production owned by the workers who used it instead of a separate investor class. It has egalitarian distribution of resources as a goal. That's it. That's socialism in it's entirety. (Communism in contrast had the goal of a classless society through state ownership of property.) Read up on it.
Also, the Nazis were a fascist party which won votes as an alternative to the democratic and communistic parties taking hold in the Weimar Republic. If you knew anything about the Nazis other than their name, you'd know that they accused both laissez-faire capitalism and communism of both being failed ideologies. The Nazis explicitly sought to preserve the middle class instead of to purely side with the poorer working class. It was a nationalist party first, and "socialist" party purely as a matter of propoganda to sell it to the public.
If you really think the Nazis were socialist, you need to read up on the 1934 Charter of Labor. It set up a system in which the entrepreneur made all the decisions for a company, and the workers owed him a duty of faithfulness. (Companies did have advisory boards where workers could advise the owner of a factory, and the state could outright replace them, so it's not a particularly free-market system either.)
As for the Holodomor in Ukraine, well, not much to say there. That was what happens when people put ideology above common sense and human decency. China's Great Leap Forward was another fine example of that. Our own history on slavery, child labor, and murderous strike breaking shows examples where putting capitalism over human decency led to horrors as well, so I'm not sure exactly why we should consider one philosophy more or less dangerous than the other. Anyway, I think I've wasted too much time recapping world history and to a crazy, grossly ignorant AC, but...
Oh, and the heart monitors in many school districts have a USB port and can be uploaded to a program on the teachers desktop to monitor a child's progress. take just one more step and have that data put in the students transcript and this isn't such a far fetched concern.
Except they'd then have to comply with HIPPA and all of its restraints on sharing of medical data. Oh, wait, I forgot -- government regulation is all evil or something. Whatever, let's put aside the legal liabilities involved.
Guess what? When I was a kid, our PE teacher had this radical technology called a clipboard that he used to record all our heart rates. It was just one more step to put that in paper files for each student, and I guess that makes it not a
Why not? Does somehow using profanity make you less likely to live in a world based on facts? Then again, a person probably needs to talk and act like an elitist to live in a world based on fact.
No. It's just a sign of character. It's the whole "eating dirt" and crazy rant based on stereotypes of liberals without of any knowledge about Oregon's actual tax rates that makes you divorced from reality.
(Not that your disdainful, holier-than-thou attitude towards Oregon makes you an elitist apparently.)
This has to be some legalistic crap. Anybody who has ever done so knows that aerobic exercise feels good. If you're working too hard, you feel breathless. The military have a good way to evaluate this, when they run and sing a cadence.
And yet, as a child, no one told me about this at all. They had me measure my heart rate, but never told me what it was good for, or the fact that I was massively overexerting myself, so the notion that "aerobic exercise feels good" is frankly completely foreign to me. I never learned how to do it right, and I got easily winded whenever I tried.
I only in recent years learned about how you can use your heart rate to better set a proper level of exercise, and I wonder how much better shape I'd be in right now if I had learned at a younger age how to properly exercise before I got into completely sedentary habits. I say more power to the school system for trying these out -- if and only if they use this data to teach kids how to work out.