"What questions I'd like to see answered? Where do socks go in the laundry? Why do people obsess about the incongruities in gilligan's island? Why do good things happen to people who aren't me? 42. (now find me the question)"
To which I'd add, why do tornadoes only touch down in trailer parks?
BTW, the socks one I can answer: They travel through wormholes and emerge in the back of the closet as spare hangers.
My guess is you don't have any personal experience with one or the other, or you'd know there is in fact a substantial difference.
I don't take issue with your general remarks about our drug(ged) culture or the hypocrisy of the WoD, but equivocating cocaine and caffiene is ridiculous.
Pretty much exactly what I was going to say. My experience has been that any organization exceeding 25-50 employess begins to take on the appearance of a Dilbert strip. It varies from department to department, of course, but ultimately those pieces have to interact, and you will find yourself dealing with PHBs, the marketing demons, etc.
Nice reference. Thanks! However, scroll was also used as a verb prior to that to describe writing on a scroll of parchment, but I don't think you'd connect those as continuous use of the same term of art. Scroll in the editor is a natural extension of the physical act of scrolling the teletype. It's not entirely intuitive that horizontal, vertical or even diagonal scrolling of a graphics window would also be called scrolling.
I'd be surprised to learn that was true. I'm pretty sure "platformer" as a term of art didn't come about until there were a substantial number of games on which to base the term. The earliest I can remember is Pitfall, though there were probably even older ones, but I never heard the term "platformer" describing a class of games until into the 1990s.
Likewise for "scrolling", it is likely game developers just talked about "following", or "moving" or other ways of describing the background movement. I don't have any evidence to back this up, just a vague sense of being aware of the games long before I ever heard those terms used to describe them.
I think you miss my point. I probably would have bought both editions and been happy, but why do I now have to re-buy the redux bundled with the original version?
BTW, the market for the used copies of the redux trilogy just went down the toilet. I'll credit them with brilliant fan-screwing strategy.
I should have known they'd eventually cave to milk another buck out of me. I never would have bought the redux trilogy if I'd believed this was coming. Sad thing is, I know I'll buy them...
"The same goes for "leverage"; just say "use" instead. Please?"
I have to disagree with you there. "Leverage" (as a verb) does have a precise meaning that "use" does not, and it is sometimes appropriate. Not always, but sometimes.
On the other hand, the one that kills me is "utilize" instead of "use". Utilize also has a precise shade of meaning distinct from use, but most people using utilize instead of use aren't using it.
For example, that last sentence would read:
Utilize also has a precise shade of meaning distinct from use, but most people utilizing utilize instead of use aren't utilizing it.
I'm mentally touring my office, which contains Unix, Linux and MS developers and I don't detect any appreciable difference in body type, dietary habits or marital status. So, you'll have to figure out another angle for your shill.
I think this is great. Knowing how kids typically react to this kind of thing fom parents, we can be virtually assured they will rebel against MS as adolescents and grow up to be Linux developers!
As said by someone else on this thread, "noone held a gun to their head."
The bottom line is they laid out the terms of how they did business and noone was obligated to buy. Likewise, Google is under no obligation to adapt their way of doing business because analysts don't like it. The majority shareholders set the terms, and they have the right to be risky, even stupid. They can ride the stock and the company right into the ground if they want to. The other possibility is they will turn out to be right. How many times has conventional wisdom from analysts lost people money?
You're probably right about the run up IPO. That's another topic entirely...
If GOOG was up front with their way of doing business and it's acceptable by SEC and other relevant regulators and the analysts don't like it, then I say the analysts can kiss GOOG's multicolored ass.
I dug all the way down to -1 to see what you had to say that elicited such a response. Glad I did, for once.
"a liberal ecofreak troll reference to the fact that us Americans are fat, wasteful, materialistic boobs"
Statistically speaking, I think that's a pretty fair statement. Americans are overweight/obese in numbers greater than any time in history and getting fatter. We are wasteful. I see people every day dumping reusable/recyclable items into the trashbin. We are materialistic, obsessed with status symbols and consumption, and we are boobs who can name more judges on American Idol than rights guaranteed by the First Ammendment.
"whose culture will eventually be the downfall of mankind."
Not until it spreads to the rest of the world it won't, but don't worry, our fundie millenarist prez is working on that.:-)
"parent-poster-type people would feel the Earth would be much better off if we crushed all of the technology we have and return to a pre-Industrial revolution society for the good of the planet and the three flippered platypus"
Don't be so sure. Fat people driving H2s to WalMart is a long way from an example of "using" our technology. Using our technology would be using alternative energy sources and developing energy efficient means of production and transportation. Our current "technology" is controlled by the whims of fickle, cheap consumers, Madison Avenue, and industry lobbyists. There is no reason for a monstrosity like the H2 to exist, and even if I stretch my credulity to assume there is they are not being used for those reasons. They are being used by status conscious, self-obsessed twits to hustle groceries from one block to the next. The SUV industry even exploited that sense of disregard for the rest of the world in their ad campaigns. Here are a couple scenes you may remember if you've watched TV spots for SUVs: tiny tiffany bags in the cargo area, throwing a box of dog biscuits to the foot traveller threatened by wolves.
Enough. Rant off. Maybe you were just trolling, and if so, touche. Otherwise, I think you're way off the mark to assume that because someone is against pointless excess, waste, and self-obsession that they are a Luddite who wants to draw us back into a pre-industrial state.
Slashdot Mirror
I just stand on my head and use my right-side-up phone!
"What questions I'd like to see answered? Where do socks go in the laundry? Why do people obsess about the incongruities in gilligan's island? Why do good things happen to people who aren't me? 42. (now find me the question)"
To which I'd add, why do tornadoes only touch down in trailer parks?
BTW, the socks one I can answer: They travel through wormholes and emerge in the back of the closet as spare hangers.
Of course they do, but I doubt very many people in those positions walk out without giving notice.
AC's Work History:
Wendy's
Taco Bell
KFC
McDonalds
(or at least, that's my excuse for being a day late with the news submission)
I thought it was because you were using that Procrastnatr calendar thingy...
My guess is you don't have any personal experience with one or the other, or you'd know there is in fact a substantial difference.
I don't take issue with your general remarks about our drug(ged) culture or the hypocrisy of the WoD, but equivocating cocaine and caffiene is ridiculous.
Pretty much exactly what I was going to say. My experience has been that any organization exceeding 25-50 employess begins to take on the appearance of a Dilbert strip. It varies from department to department, of course, but ultimately those pieces have to interact, and you will find yourself dealing with PHBs, the marketing demons, etc.
Make friends with every random bozo on MySpace and completely destroy the quality of their demographic analysis.
Yeah, yeah, your in-laws. That's kind of like those old "My friend" stories...
That's not an upgrade, it's a downgrade. MS has never been very good at doing that...
OK, so what's "existance"?
(JOKE! JOKE! Please don't flame me for spellchecking...)
I knew I could count on someone to either know or do the research I was too lazy to do myself. :-) Thanks for setting the record straight!
Nice reference. Thanks! However, scroll was also used as a verb prior to that to describe writing on a scroll of parchment, but I don't think you'd connect those as continuous use of the same term of art. Scroll in the editor is a natural extension of the physical act of scrolling the teletype. It's not entirely intuitive that horizontal, vertical or even diagonal scrolling of a graphics window would also be called scrolling.
I'd be surprised to learn that was true. I'm pretty sure "platformer" as a term of art didn't come about until there were a substantial number of games on which to base the term. The earliest I can remember is Pitfall, though there were probably even older ones, but I never heard the term "platformer" describing a class of games until into the 1990s.
Likewise for "scrolling", it is likely game developers just talked about "following", or "moving" or other ways of describing the background movement. I don't have any evidence to back this up, just a vague sense of being aware of the games long before I ever heard those terms used to describe them.
I think you miss my point. I probably would have bought both editions and been happy, but why do I now have to re-buy the redux bundled with the original version?
BTW, the market for the used copies of the redux trilogy just went down the toilet. I'll credit them with brilliant fan-screwing strategy.
I'm not among the redux haters, so I don't mind that I bought those versions. I'm just miffed that I have to re-buy them to get the originals!
I should have known they'd eventually cave to milk another buck out of me. I never would have bought the redux trilogy if I'd believed this was coming. Sad thing is, I know I'll buy them...
"The same goes for "leverage"; just say "use" instead. Please?"
I have to disagree with you there. "Leverage" (as a verb) does have a precise meaning that "use" does not, and it is sometimes appropriate. Not always, but sometimes.
On the other hand, the one that kills me is "utilize" instead of "use". Utilize also has a precise shade of meaning distinct from use, but most people using utilize instead of use aren't using it.
For example, that last sentence would read:
Utilize also has a precise shade of meaning distinct from use, but most people utilizing utilize instead of use aren't utilizing it.
Have you ever actually seen Steve Balmer?
I'm mentally touring my office, which contains Unix, Linux and MS developers and I don't detect any appreciable difference in body type, dietary habits or marital status. So, you'll have to figure out another angle for your shill.
I think this is great. Knowing how kids typically react to this kind of thing fom parents, we can be virtually assured they will rebel against MS as adolescents and grow up to be Linux developers!
From one of Taylor's letters:
"I have no fear of the media, in fact I welcome this publicity."
You think he still welcomes it today?
I don't know if I trust them or not, but I would trust them less were they to not stick to their guns and cave to analyst pressure.
As said by someone else on this thread, "noone held a gun to their head."
The bottom line is they laid out the terms of how they did business and noone was obligated to buy. Likewise, Google is under no obligation to adapt their way of doing business because analysts don't like it. The majority shareholders set the terms, and they have the right to be risky, even stupid. They can ride the stock and the company right into the ground if they want to. The other possibility is they will turn out to be right. How many times has conventional wisdom from analysts lost people money?
You're probably right about the run up IPO. That's another topic entirely...
If GOOG was up front with their way of doing business and it's acceptable by SEC and other relevant regulators and the analysts don't like it, then I say the analysts can kiss GOOG's multicolored ass.
I dug all the way down to -1 to see what you had to say that elicited such a response. Glad I did, for once.
:-)
"a liberal ecofreak troll reference to the fact that us Americans are fat, wasteful, materialistic boobs"
Statistically speaking, I think that's a pretty fair statement. Americans are overweight/obese in numbers greater than any time in history and getting fatter. We are wasteful. I see people every day dumping reusable/recyclable items into the trashbin. We are materialistic, obsessed with status symbols and consumption, and we are boobs who can name more judges on American Idol than rights guaranteed by the First Ammendment.
"whose culture will eventually be the downfall of mankind."
Not until it spreads to the rest of the world it won't, but don't worry, our fundie millenarist prez is working on that.
"parent-poster-type people would feel the Earth would be much better off if we crushed all of the technology we have and return to a pre-Industrial revolution society for the good of the planet and the three flippered platypus"
Don't be so sure. Fat people driving H2s to WalMart is a long way from an example of "using" our technology. Using our technology would be using alternative energy sources and developing energy efficient means of production and transportation. Our current "technology" is controlled by the whims of fickle, cheap consumers, Madison Avenue, and industry lobbyists. There is no reason for a monstrosity like the H2 to exist, and even if I stretch my credulity to assume there is they are not being used for those reasons. They are being used by status conscious, self-obsessed twits to hustle groceries from one block to the next. The SUV industry even exploited that sense of disregard for the rest of the world in their ad campaigns. Here are a couple scenes you may remember if you've watched TV spots for SUVs: tiny tiffany bags in the cargo area, throwing a box of dog biscuits to the foot traveller threatened by wolves.
Enough. Rant off. Maybe you were just trolling, and if so, touche. Otherwise, I think you're way off the mark to assume that because someone is against pointless excess, waste, and self-obsession that they are a Luddite who wants to draw us back into a pre-industrial state.