No, you don't. You really don't. You give as much as you choose to while maintaining the standard of living you consider necessary.
Unless you are living on the streets, eating out of dumpsters, wearing rags, you are not giving everything you can, and I don't think you can argue that anyone else should, no matter how much it would benefit your personal chosen cause.
If I'm going on a sales jaunt out of the building then I'll prolly want more than just that app anyway, and for those I'll want a proper screen and keyboard. So I want the laptop anyway, and I don't want to take this thing in addition.
If I'm going somewhere with a digi camera / cam corder, then I usually take enough storage not to need to get to a server. If it needs to get sent home regularly, then I see your point.
I'm not sure they did 'toe the line'. I suspect the PRC wanted them to do just what MSN, Yahoo etc did: return search results from which some results were removed.
At least Google insisted on putting 'some results have been removed due to local laws' or whatever it is (I don't read kanji!) on the bottom, and if it really was that or nothing, I'd rather the Chinese got at least a hint that there was something going on.
(Yes you could call that google fanboyism. I don't)
What do they care about the stock price? These guys have more personal cash than they'll ever need. As far as I can tell, they actually want to change the world.
The mantra to 'maximise shareholder value' has never had a particular timescale defined, as far as I know.
I agree - moreover, I think this is key to OO coding.
We take the instructions to the computer and wrap them up in manipulable objects. Most, if not all, of the business code should be objects interacting. Below that level the objects will talk to the computer.
This enables us to both think in business terms and in efficient execution terms.
nor the UK Labor leadership "lied" about WMDs. Worst-case, they were wrong
No, best case is Blair lied by omission. When the 45 minutes claim was made, by Blair personally, it was taken by absolutely every newspaper to be referring to offensive weaponry and Blair made no attempt to correct that impression. In fact, not only was it wrong, it referred to battlefield munitions that could only be used defensively - in other words, we were only threatened by them if we invaded.
The man is a lawyer: he should know what is meant by "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but". He lied.
IIRC, American Federal Law was held to apply over the whole world quite some time ago, like well over fifty years. I can't find a reference for it unfortunately.
I agree that it's not asking places to do so is not too much. It *is* asking too much to insist on it.
If you need to be sure that you are on the net then it remains your responsibility to monitor your reception, not everyone else's to ensure it remains good.
It's your pager, it's your responsibility. Get one that vibrates if it loses reception so you can do something about it.
They don't make one? Keep checking reception yourself till they do. I assume you already do this if you enter any close steel framed area, right? Or does it somehow not matter if your pager doesn't work due to you being in, say, a shoeshop with steel structural elements? Or one half of the building I work in.
Just because these things have worked well (and to your advantage) in the past does not give you a right to expect them to work in the future. There are other people for whom universal cell coverage has been a disadvantage. In this example we call them movie/theatre/concert goers.
Slashdot Mirror
100lb of anything vs 100llb of ants?
No, you don't. You really don't. You give as much as you choose to while maintaining the standard of living you consider necessary.
Unless you are living on the streets, eating out of dumpsters, wearing rags, you are not giving everything you can, and I don't think you can argue that anyone else should, no matter how much it would benefit your personal chosen cause.
Justin.
You're assuming that refusing to give guidance will result in a lower stock price - all I have read is it will result in greater volatility.
Justin.
So you've given everything you own to charity right?
J.
Interesting.
If I'm going on a sales jaunt out of the building then I'll prolly want more than just that app anyway, and for those I'll want a proper screen and keyboard. So I want the laptop anyway, and I don't want to take this thing in addition.
If I'm going somewhere with a digi camera / cam corder, then I usually take enough storage not to need to get to a server. If it needs to get sent home regularly, then I see your point.
Cheers,
Justin.
That's not breaking 'do no evil' that's "they didn't do some good that they could have done".
By the same token, I only give to two charities: I could give to lots more, but failing to do so does not make me evil.
Justin.
I'm not sure they did 'toe the line'. I suspect the PRC wanted them to do just what MSN, Yahoo etc did: return search results from which some results were removed.
At least Google insisted on putting 'some results have been removed due to local laws' or whatever it is (I don't read kanji!) on the bottom, and if it really was that or nothing, I'd rather the Chinese got at least a hint that there was something going on.
(Yes you could call that google fanboyism. I don't)
Justin.
Why is it not good?
Really, I don't understand why you state that, and so I don't accept it per se.
Please explain.
Justin.
What do they care about the stock price? These guys have more personal cash than they'll ever need. As far as I can tell, they actually want to change the world.
The mantra to 'maximise shareholder value' has never had a particular timescale defined, as far as I know.
Justin.
Tell 'em to
1) get bent
and
2) do their own work, the lazy bastards.
Love,
Justin.
Tell me anywhere and anywhen you wouldn't rather take either an 'instant-on, massive battery-life PDA' or a 'decent keyboard 'n' screen laptop'
I dare you.
Justin.
The links don't open in a middle-click and they are the same colour even when I've visited the site.
This is basic for web use - especially when I am working though a list of search results. Their designers should be fired.
Justin.
Liar
I agree - moreover, I think this is key to OO coding.
We take the instructions to the computer and wrap them up in manipulable objects. Most, if not all, of the business code should be objects interacting. Below that level the objects will talk to the computer.
This enables us to both think in business terms and in efficient execution terms.
Justin.
No, best case is Blair lied by omission. When the 45 minutes claim was made, by Blair personally, it was taken by absolutely every newspaper to be referring to offensive weaponry and Blair made no attempt to correct that impression. In fact, not only was it wrong, it referred to battlefield munitions that could only be used defensively - in other words, we were only threatened by them if we invaded.
The man is a lawyer: he should know what is meant by "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but". He lied.
Justin.
He did say he was a slut.
J.
That's not really extension stuff is it? Perhaps you should try suggesting it at the bugzilla for FireFox, rather than here?
I gotta laugh that some idiot mod rated your comment interesting instead of offtopic though!
J.
IIRC, American Federal Law was held to apply over the whole world quite some time ago, like well over fifty years. I can't find a reference for it unfortunately.
Cheers,
Justin.
It's pretty simple already - perhaps we should try out that 'guns don't kill people, people kill people' on them.
;-)
I reckon both work, but perhaps we should just check...
J.
I think that is fair, and I would be unimpressed if I found myself in a theatre with no signal at all due to the paint.
But my point is rather that you might find that anyway, just from the way the building is made. Would you want your money back then?
J.
In theory, the discussion is about the linked article.
;-)
In practice, the discussion is the usual slashbot/troll fest.
Sorry about that, but that's humans for you. The article may still be interesting though... I should just read that if I were you
Justin.
But at least he can spell and punctuate.
Justin, 35.
I might write a letter to NICE, I think.
Justin.
I agree that it's not asking places to do so is not too much. It *is* asking too much to insist on it.
If you need to be sure that you are on the net then it remains your responsibility to monitor your reception, not everyone else's to ensure it remains good.
J.
It's your pager, it's your responsibility. Get one that vibrates if it loses reception so you can do something about it.
They don't make one? Keep checking reception yourself till they do. I assume you already do this if you enter any close steel framed area, right? Or does it somehow not matter if your pager doesn't work due to you being in, say, a shoeshop with steel structural elements? Or one half of the building I work in.
Just because these things have worked well (and to your advantage) in the past does not give you a right to expect them to work in the future. There are other people for whom universal cell coverage has been a disadvantage. In this example we call them movie/theatre/concert goers.
Justin.