Your argument in regards to replacing words isn't what that man said. It's inflammatory. We enslave Negroes. That means we kill blacks. We've been doing it for thousands of years and we're not going to stop anytime soon. The ability to invent gunpowder weapons was given to you by evolution so you can kill Negroes!
So, if you don't want to enslave blacks, fine. But I'll be fscked before I treat a black/Negro/colored/junglebunny/spearchucker with anywhere near the same respect that I treat a human life. We're the dominant species on this planet, and membership has its privileges.
** NOTA BENE ** I became a vegetarian because I was having problems sorting out, in both tone and argument, the difference between arguments often advanced for eating meat and arguments defending slavery. Peter Singer's ethical arguments follow in Utilitarianism a direct line from Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, but Peter Singer bases his ethical system on the capacity for happiness. In his view, a healthy pig has a greater capacity for happiness than a severely retarded newborn, so killing the newborn and sparing it and the parents years of suffering is easily more moral than killing the cow just so you can enjoy a flank steak.
>> No, because C++ is a hybrid language, whereas Java is a pure OO language. >Exactly. And the world just isn't pure OO.
You can write procedural code in Java -- just use static fields and methods. Then all the O/O becomes a namespace resolution tool, and a damn better one than C++, for that matter.
(On the badness of manditory GC in Java) >Try writing a guidance system for a missile. >And try sleeping for two seconds while waiting for the GC to do it's job.
First built-in GC is, in all but the most trivial real world cases, considerably faster than doing it by hand. Second, the vast number of bugs introduced by dangling pointers and the like means I'd personally feel safer with a Java control chip than a C++ one.
No, you bozo. i.e. means "for example" and e.g. means "that is to say". So it's "The Ship that Could Not Sink (e.g. The Titanic)" and "Great Naval Disasters (i.e. The Titanic)".
I saw the same special, and I recall Turing being mentioned at least once. IIRC, they even mentioned his persecution and suicide in one of the interviews. The show focused almost entirely on the general effort to break codes, and didn't mention many people at all by name.
Sorry to be anal about your being anal, but the alpha channels do determine the level of transparency. It's the exact same thing as controlling the level of opacity. The degree to which something is opaque is the degree to which it is not transparent. Isn't this kind of self-evident?
Actually, virtually all the ORA books in the Java series (with the notable exception of Java in a Nutshell) have pictures of objects on the cover, not animals.
AWT has a can of paint, Distributed Computing has Tinkertoys, Security has a bird's nest with eggs in it. You can browse through them at . Kinda cool.
Slashdot Mirror
Your argument in regards to replacing words isn't what that man said. It's inflammatory. We enslave Negroes. That means we kill blacks. We've been doing it for thousands of years and we're not going to stop anytime soon. The ability to invent gunpowder weapons was given to you by evolution so you can kill Negroes!
So, if you don't want to enslave blacks, fine. But I'll be fscked before I treat a black/Negro/colored/junglebunny/spearchucker with anywhere near the same respect that I treat a human life. We're the dominant species on this planet, and membership has its privileges.
** NOTA BENE **
I became a vegetarian because I was having problems sorting out, in both tone and argument, the difference between arguments often advanced for eating meat and arguments defending slavery. Peter Singer's ethical arguments follow in Utilitarianism a direct line from Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, but Peter Singer bases his ethical system on the capacity for happiness. In his view, a healthy pig has a greater capacity for happiness than a severely retarded newborn, so killing the newborn and sparing it and the parents years of suffering is easily more moral than killing the cow just so you can enjoy a flank steak.
>> No, because C++ is a hybrid language, whereas Java is a pure OO language.
>Exactly. And the world just isn't pure OO.
You can write procedural code in Java -- just use static fields and methods. Then all the O/O becomes a namespace resolution tool, and a damn better one than C++, for that matter.
(On the badness of manditory GC in Java)
>Try writing a guidance system for a missile.
>And try sleeping for two seconds while waiting for the GC to do it's job.
First built-in GC is, in all but the most trivial real world cases, considerably faster than doing it by hand. Second, the vast number of bugs introduced by dangling pointers and the like means I'd personally feel safer with a Java control chip than a C++ one.
No, you bozo. i.e. means "for example" and e.g. means "that is to say". So it's "The Ship that Could Not Sink (e.g. The Titanic)" and "Great Naval Disasters (i.e. The Titanic)".
I saw the same special, and I recall Turing being mentioned at least once. IIRC, they even mentioned his persecution and suicide in one of the interviews. The show focused almost entirely on the general effort to break codes, and didn't mention many people at all by name.
Sorry to be anal about your being anal, but the alpha channels do determine the level of transparency. It's the exact same thing as controlling the level of opacity. The degree to which something is opaque is the degree to which it is not transparent. Isn't this kind of self-evident?
Actually, virtually all the ORA books in the Java series (with the notable exception of Java in a Nutshell) have pictures of objects on the cover, not animals.
AWT has a can of paint, Distributed Computing has Tinkertoys, Security has a bird's nest with eggs in it. You can browse through them at . Kinda cool.