is going to do something with a database and get a customer. a comment telling me that is useless.
A small nit-pick... Because the data store should (in theory) be something that changes, it may not be wise to expose that in a method name. A database is fairly stable, but I've seen enough code called things like "readFromFile" that eventually read from another data source, but the name remained. It causes unnecessary confusion.
Re:The comments are proof that it works
on
Paul Graham on PR
·
· Score: 1
Interesting observation; however, I think that some people defending the suit (myself included) are of the mind that it never really left. Personally I don't mind if other people want to dress down as long as people don't make an issue out of me wearing something nice. There is a peculiar type of peer pressure for snappy dressers to give up the effort and join the crowd.
Now that is an interesting type of PR that we should address.
Coming from IWorkForMorons, I harbor a little distrust for your opinion on workplace etiquette. That said, I don't think anyone will claim that a suit makes someone a better person, but dressing nicely will give someone an edge, all things being equal. Just something to consider.
Good observation. Although it may sound a little manipulative, a wise person should dress and act the part they desire, not the part the part they play. Naturally, it has to be done within reason, but there is something to be said for looking the part.
Work in a prison for awhile or have someone you know or love killed by someone and you won't be calling for inmates to get the things they want.
I guess this depends if you want prisons for retribution or rehabilitation. I have no doubt that the victims and their families want retribution, but I believe we will decrease recidivism only if we set aside our desire for revenge in favor of rehabilitation.
For what it is worth, I don't see Internet access as part of that rehabilitation.
By any measure, this isn't academic rigor. Your paper may be very good, but I hope you don't mean to imply that research professors should give up on citing journals.
Or, a wikipedia-type system, where everyone can review the article, and everyone else can read the reviews and decide for themselves.
Everyone? Should we put the studied opinions of professors, graduate students and lay persons on equal footing? I think not. This is akin to letting the Intelligent Design crowd debate Biologists, creating an illusion to the mass public of scientific doubt. Many issues for publication have a political angle that can be minimized by giving weight to studied opinions.
I think we can agree that both parties are wrong to some extent, but I don't think you realize the implicit trust that underlies academic publishing. While a certain skepticism should remain about the assertions of a paper, almost universally we trust that the motives are of a scholarly nature. In some round about way Sokol may have performed a useful academic function by taunting Social Text; however, there are many other journals under the larger umbrella of Postmodernism that suffered. From what I hear people say here about that branch of Humanist studies, they may find this to be a good side effect, but I think Postmodernism is part of a long line of effort to comprehend ourselves.
A few others have taken a pretty vicious attitude toward my friend who almost quoted Sokol's paper. I should have put more emphasis on almost because people in this thread have injected their ridicule onto this person for no good reason.
Why is it "intellectually dishonest" to point out that a journal is publishing vacuous drivel?
The hard and honest way is to write something to rebut the vacuous drivel. Publishing a fake paper and then mocking the publication just doesn't seem to be the academic way of doing things.
Where is the dishonesty in not saying anything? Sokal's paper was vacuous, so he was really doing no more than encouraging Social Text to publish some blank sheets of paper.
I know someone who considered citing the paper in a dissertation. Fortunately she noticed the retraction before doing so, but it would have been an embarrassment to say the least. Of course we can say that anyone who cites the paper deserves ridicule, but this sort of thing can cause real harm to people's livelihood.
Maybe this wake up call was necessary, but prior to Sokol's publication there was a healthy inter disciplinary effort between the humanities and sciences. It isn't hard to see how this publication put a wedge between the camps. For that reason I consider it intellectually dishonest, but there is no consensus.
It may sound like a nice prank, but it was (and still is) considered intellectually dishonest to permit the thing to go to publication, even if Social Text failed in their peer review process.
As one of the people who have been around here for a while (moderately low UID (yeah there are smaller (no, I don't always comment in LISP))), I remember a time when the Gods of/. participated in the discussions. That was before someone ate from the tree of First Post and Goats.ex. We were all more innocent back then.
Really, things got whiney around here and I think they become weary dealing with someone always being upset about something. However, I do agree with the grandparent post about visualization for slashdot. That would be cool.
Incidentally, should the slashdot Gods hear our prayers, let it be known that we repent for whining. Let's all hang out in the garden again, okay?
The exploit (work around, if you prefer) takes advantage of the fact that the DRM is applied on the client, not the server. Unless iTunes sends some confirmation message back to Apple, they are non the wiser. I'm not saying this is right, ethical or anything else, but I don't believe Apple at present has any way to know who strips the DRM.
Since April 2002, FOX News has consistently doctored Associated Press articles featured on the FOX News website concerning terrorist attacks in the Middle East to conform to Bush administration terminology. Without any editorial notation disclosing that words in the AP articles have been changed, FOX News replaces the terms "suicide bomber" and "suicide bombing" with "homicide bomber" and "homicide bombing" to describe attackers who kill themselves and others with explosives. In at least one case, FOX News actually altered an AP quote from Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) to fit this naming convention, and then revised it to restore the quote without noting either the original alteration or its correction.
I understand that it is regular practice to edit AP reports, but editing a direct quote is partisan.
Actually, I find the interface of the old rotary phones to be well done. I imagine the disabled have more trouble with the miniature phones we have today. While cordless phones are handy in a sense, no one ever had to look under the sofa cushion for the good old rotary phone, because it stayed put on a desk. While I generally prefer newer phones, there is something to be said for the simple user interface of old phones.
Fantastic advice. I have a 16 year old nephew and I'm trying my best to relay this to him, but it is hard. If there is anything I could convey to a young person it would be to comprehend a larger social network than their high school. That environment is frighteningly myopic.
Who is this contingent clamoring for assistance with their suicide? I suspect that a person who really wants to die can do so just fine without assistance.
Ironically, there are some parallels with the notion of building a cathedral. For example, the Duomo in Sienna Italy took 200 years just to do the tile on the floor. Nothing like it is built today because no one is willing to bankroll any project that can't be achieved in a normal lifetime. I don't mean this as an endorsement of middle ages Catholic practices or governance, but de Grey may need to look into our past to see examples of perseverance.
I read the article this morning. When I came to the second quote (...things we had refuted in the first half of the day) it just read to me like he was being criticized for not being part of the group-think.
Remember how video card manufacturers were tweaking their drivers to perform well in benchmarks? "Musicians", and I use that term loosely, will be tweaking their songs to score a "hit" on this service.
At least you aren't calling them artists, as many people do. I hate it when someone like Brittney Spears refers to herself as an artist. Gag.
Except that creationism isn't a theory, in the sense that the word is used by scientists. When I encounter creationists I ask them about new discoveries or predictions that creationism has produced. I have yet to hear of one. While I respect the faith of others, I take issue with putting faith on the same level as science.
Excellent advice. Of course, if you don't have any consulting income it doesn't make a lot of sense, but a person would be a fool to not consult a CPA if he or she does consulting. The power of pre-tax spending is a fantastic thing. Once I got a clue, I never looked at the world the same again.
In general, you have to get out of (or supplement) the w-2 income route to get a leg up on taxes. A business person simply considered taxes to be the largest expense and does whatever is ethical and expedient to reduce that expense. A CPA is your friend and pays for itself.
I believe it is possible to do an internship and enjoy the summer. I did two internships during college and it was a great and enjoyable experience. Most students do some form of work during the summer, so it might as well further the career.
Most importantly, I knew people who did internships and learned that they were on the wrong career path. It is better to know before finishing the degree.
Tue Jan 19 03:14:01 2038 Tue Jan 19 03:14:02 2038 Tue Jan 19 03:14:03 2038 Tue Jan 19 03:14:04 2038 Tue Jan 19 03:14:05 2038 Tue Jan 19 03:14:06 2038 Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038 Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038 Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038 Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038
Slashdot Mirror
GetCustomerFromDatabase(foo)
is going to do something with a database and get a customer. a comment telling me that is useless.
A small nit-pick... Because the data store should (in theory) be something that changes, it may not be wise to expose that in a method name. A database is fairly stable, but I've seen enough code called things like "readFromFile" that eventually read from another data source, but the name remained. It causes unnecessary confusion.
Interesting observation; however, I think that some people defending the suit (myself included) are of the mind that it never really left. Personally I don't mind if other people want to dress down as long as people don't make an issue out of me wearing something nice. There is a peculiar type of peer pressure for snappy dressers to give up the effort and join the crowd.
Now that is an interesting type of PR that we should address.
Coming from IWorkForMorons, I harbor a little distrust for your opinion on workplace etiquette. That said, I don't think anyone will claim that a suit makes someone a better person, but dressing nicely will give someone an edge, all things being equal. Just something to consider.
Good observation. Although it may sound a little manipulative, a wise person should dress and act the part they desire, not the part the part they play. Naturally, it has to be done within reason, but there is something to be said for looking the part.
Work in a prison for awhile or have someone you know or love killed by someone and you won't be calling for inmates to get the things they want.
I guess this depends if you want prisons for retribution or rehabilitation. I have no doubt that the victims and their families want retribution, but I believe we will decrease recidivism only if we set aside our desire for revenge in favor of rehabilitation.
For what it is worth, I don't see Internet access as part of that rehabilitation.
...using sources I only found through google...
By any measure, this isn't academic rigor. Your paper may be very good, but I hope you don't mean to imply that research professors should give up on citing journals.
Or, a wikipedia-type system, where everyone can review the article, and everyone else can read the reviews and decide for themselves.
Everyone? Should we put the studied opinions of professors, graduate students and lay persons on equal footing? I think not. This is akin to letting the Intelligent Design crowd debate Biologists, creating an illusion to the mass public of scientific doubt. Many issues for publication have a political angle that can be minimized by giving weight to studied opinions.
I think we can agree that both parties are wrong to some extent, but I don't think you realize the implicit trust that underlies academic publishing. While a certain skepticism should remain about the assertions of a paper, almost universally we trust that the motives are of a scholarly nature. In some round about way Sokol may have performed a useful academic function by taunting Social Text; however, there are many other journals under the larger umbrella of Postmodernism that suffered. From what I hear people say here about that branch of Humanist studies, they may find this to be a good side effect, but I think Postmodernism is part of a long line of effort to comprehend ourselves.
A few others have taken a pretty vicious attitude toward my friend who almost quoted Sokol's paper. I should have put more emphasis on almost because people in this thread have injected their ridicule onto this person for no good reason.
Why is it "intellectually dishonest" to point out that a journal is publishing vacuous drivel?
The hard and honest way is to write something to rebut the vacuous drivel. Publishing a fake paper and then mocking the publication just doesn't seem to be the academic way of doing things.
Where is the dishonesty in not saying anything? Sokal's paper was vacuous, so he was really doing no more than encouraging Social Text to publish some blank sheets of paper.
I know someone who considered citing the paper in a dissertation. Fortunately she noticed the retraction before doing so, but it would have been an embarrassment to say the least. Of course we can say that anyone who cites the paper deserves ridicule, but this sort of thing can cause real harm to people's livelihood.
Maybe this wake up call was necessary, but prior to Sokol's publication there was a healthy inter disciplinary effort between the humanities and sciences. It isn't hard to see how this publication put a wedge between the camps. For that reason I consider it intellectually dishonest, but there is no consensus.
For those unfamiliar with the situation, the should read the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_Affair
It may sound like a nice prank, but it was (and still is) considered intellectually dishonest to permit the thing to go to publication, even if Social Text failed in their peer review process.
As one of the people who have been around here for a while (moderately low UID (yeah there are smaller (no, I don't always comment in LISP))), I remember a time when the Gods of /. participated in the discussions. That was before someone ate from the tree of First Post and Goats.ex. We were all more innocent back then.
Really, things got whiney around here and I think they become weary dealing with someone always being upset about something. However, I do agree with the grandparent post about visualization for slashdot. That would be cool.
Incidentally, should the slashdot Gods hear our prayers, let it be known that we repent for whining. Let's all hang out in the garden again, okay?
The exploit (work around, if you prefer) takes advantage of the fact that the DRM is applied on the client, not the server. Unless iTunes sends some confirmation message back to Apple, they are non the wiser. I'm not saying this is right, ethical or anything else, but I don't believe Apple at present has any way to know who strips the DRM.
No, it means that you will need two post it notes on your monitor.
Since you asked, check this out:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200502230006
I quote:
Since April 2002, FOX News has consistently doctored Associated Press articles featured on the FOX News website concerning terrorist attacks in the Middle East to conform to Bush administration terminology. Without any editorial notation disclosing that words in the AP articles have been changed, FOX News replaces the terms "suicide bomber" and "suicide bombing" with "homicide bomber" and "homicide bombing" to describe attackers who kill themselves and others with explosives. In at least one case, FOX News actually altered an AP quote from Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) to fit this naming convention, and then revised it to restore the quote without noting either the original alteration or its correction.
I understand that it is regular practice to edit AP reports, but editing a direct quote is partisan.
Actually, I find the interface of the old rotary phones to be well done. I imagine the disabled have more trouble with the miniature phones we have today. While cordless phones are handy in a sense, no one ever had to look under the sofa cushion for the good old rotary phone, because it stayed put on a desk. While I generally prefer newer phones, there is something to be said for the simple user interface of old phones.
Fantastic advice. I have a 16 year old nephew and I'm trying my best to relay this to him, but it is hard. If there is anything I could convey to a young person it would be to comprehend a larger social network than their high school. That environment is frighteningly myopic.
Who is this contingent clamoring for assistance with their suicide? I suspect that a person who really wants to die can do so just fine without assistance.
Ironically, there are some parallels with the notion of building a cathedral. For example, the Duomo in Sienna Italy took 200 years just to do the tile on the floor. Nothing like it is built today because no one is willing to bankroll any project that can't be achieved in a normal lifetime. I don't mean this as an endorsement of middle ages Catholic practices or governance, but de Grey may need to look into our past to see examples of perseverance.
I read the article this morning. When I came to the second quote (...things we had refuted in the first half of the day) it just read to me like he was being criticized for not being part of the group-think.
Remember how video card manufacturers were tweaking their drivers to perform well in benchmarks? "Musicians", and I use that term loosely, will be tweaking their songs to score a "hit" on this service.
At least you aren't calling them artists, as many people do. I hate it when someone like Brittney Spears refers to herself as an artist. Gag.
Except that creationism isn't a theory, in the sense that the word is used by scientists. When I encounter creationists I ask them about new discoveries or predictions that creationism has produced. I have yet to hear of one. While I respect the faith of others, I take issue with putting faith on the same level as science.
Excellent advice. Of course, if you don't have any consulting income it doesn't make a lot of sense, but a person would be a fool to not consult a CPA if he or she does consulting. The power of pre-tax spending is a fantastic thing. Once I got a clue, I never looked at the world the same again.
In general, you have to get out of (or supplement) the w-2 income route to get a leg up on taxes. A business person simply considered taxes to be the largest expense and does whatever is ethical and expedient to reduce that expense. A CPA is your friend and pays for itself.
I believe it is possible to do an internship and enjoy the summer. I did two internships during college and it was a great and enjoyable experience. Most students do some form of work during the summer, so it might as well further the career.
Most importantly, I knew people who did internships and learned that they were on the wrong career path. It is better to know before finishing the degree.
Mac OS X (10.3.7) works well:
;)
Tue Jan 19 03:14:01 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:02 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:03 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:04 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:05 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:06 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038
Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038
Whew... one less thing to deal with.