Investigations cost money. If the registrar is making $30 a year on a domain, it isn't going to be worth a formal investigation. They might be concerned about getting a reputation as an 'easy takedown.'
Good news! Someone figured out a way to make ignoring complaints cost a lot more than $30! So, the questions for them are: Do I want to pay $300k and not even look at the site; or do I spend the 5 minutes it would take next time as part of processing the complaint and save myself the court fees?
Yes, they only make $30/year from each person, but I doubt they get complaints equivalent to each of them, either. Having some poor bastard who drew the short straw review complaints for half a day each month wouldn't cut into those profits too much, and would go a long way to reducing unexpected legal fees.
Yes, and you could reasonably make a graphical interface for assembly language. Very simple tools with very simple connectors, mapping onto the real world (transistors, pins, registers, leads). The more abstract you get, the more explicit your instructions need to be to get reliable, reproducible, complex results. It's really hard to do that with predefined building blocks, unless part of your building block is a big chunk of very specific text, which sounds remarkably like code.
Another similar thing would be comparing movies to books. The richness, detail, and depth of a book just can't be done in film, in part because we don't want to sit there that long. But also, look at all the versions of a specific book that was done, each of which was done with the goal of being at least as good as the book, and how differently they turned out. This is something we don't want to have when we write code - we want the same results every time, with no limit to expression within the capabilities of the language/compiler/hardware/etc.
Another great example is language and writing itself. There's a reason the vast majority of the world went away from using pictures to describe concepts (words) - after a while you had a huge collection of pictures, and were still limited to doing more basic writing if you didn't have a clear idea of which picture referred to which concept. And so there was a decoupling between the concept (word) and the presentation of it (writing). C-A-T spells cat, but none of those parts have anything to do with the furry critter with pointy ears, whiskers, and a love for sleeping and chasing mice.
It's not that I think it would be impossible to make a visually mapped programming language, but the more abstract elements, particularly non-interface elements, would be just as difficult as they are today simply because they are abstract, difficult concepts.
Yep, I think you're right. And while I've used code I found on the web, first I review it, test it, and then test some modifications to make sure it's doing what I think it's doing.
And yes, it's really hard to tell how valuable jQuery is to his project.
You're a hero. I'd give you gold if this was reddit. And I had gold to give. I'd post anonymously and mod up, but I already commented here and I think the mod points on this comment are already maxed out.
Or the common libraries included with, but not integral to, your OS. Or the OS itself.
This sounds like the rantings of someone who would prefer to reinvent the wheel for every project. And then complain about maintaining all that one off code.
So, your alternative is to write all the code yourself? Where do you draw the line? "Standard" libraries? Who defines standard, and for what? As a note, this is why libraries were made - lots of commonly used functions of a particular nature kept in one place - not for some threshold that I have to use before it's acceptable. Just how many calls to math.h do I have to make before it's alright to include it instead of hand-coding it myself?
I'm not completely disagreeing with your thinking, and that app you had inflicted on you sounds terrible. Also, when space (RAM and HDD) were at a premium, I would agree more than now. Even with our vast amounts of RAM, this is still a good reason to keep libraries small, focused, and tight. But I'd rather have a library used for some complex task than rely on a developer maintaining the security of a lone application. There will be plenty of bugs without adding more risk.
That said, I'm mostly with Panasonic on this one. Big library for a smaller device (it's not a full-blown computer), probably with limited use for it's target developers. The reason they give is rather poor.
I've said it elsewhere, but it bears repeating. What gets rewarded gets done. They're rewarded for giving speeding tickets, not catching criminals. Hence, someone will be sitting on the street for 8 hours a day, but it will take an hour for a break-in to be responded to. Using speeding tickets as a padding to your police/city/municipal/regional budget is going to incentivize needless speed traps and keeping speed limits lower than what is recommended by traffic studies.
It seems to me that the FBI somehow keeps itself above this crap. Perhaps its because the DEA is so good at violating our rights that the FBI lets them do the dirty work. Perhaps it's because the FBI is too busy investigating murders, assaults, rapes, arson, thefts, and so on (you know, "real" crimes) that they don't have to resort to such depths to keep busy.
I know it's been a while, but have you heard of this guy Hoover?
Do you really think that if you broke into some house, stole a computer, found hundred of horrible child porn photos of the house owner molesting children and turned that in to the police it would be unusable?
Under normal rules, if a private citizen did that, it would be perfectly admissible. If they did it at the behest of the government, whether it be police, DA, or others, then it isn't.
Or, playing the think of the children card the other way, would you prefer the police to not be able to enter a house where a kidnapper is holding a child because they heard about it from a burglar of that house?
I'm no huge fan of powerpoint presentations, but clearly aesthetics are more important in learning how to use a tool to present your message in a visual manner than the logic or rationality of the message. It's almost as silly as teaching algebra in art class, just because ratios, perspectives and pleasing geometries have a mathematical basis.
Now, why debating, logic, critical thinking, and the scientific method aren't taught to at least a basic level is a good question. It just has nothing to do with powerpoint, or marketing in general. Which is a pity.
You'd think that part of the process would have been the child being adopted by the partner who didn't provide DNA (step-child adoption). At that point, his rights would be absolved, wouldn't they? I found this in a quick search. After a quick glance, it looks like they skipped Step 2.
Funny, when I look at this page what I see is that places with a high standard of living, i.e., those that can more easily afford luxuries, have lower piracy rates. Then there is the increasing prevalence of online streaming sites. Perhaps there are multiple causes of varying degrees of significance, but the laws haven't changed much in the last decade or so while the piracy rates have decreased.
First, I think there are plenty of people who would jump through any number of hoops in order to have a normal dating life. Second, he definitely was mission-oriented, and successful, which will also be appealing to those who are wondering what to do to increase their dating pool and, therefore, their chance of finding a suitable mate.
Very good advice, and what I followed. Sure, people will be turned off, and there will be a lot of first dates/meetings. On the flip side, anyone who wants a second date has a much greater chance of being a viable partner than what you get by successfully putting up a facade on that first (second, third...) date.
But mixing crazy with crazy, that's a recipe for horror.
I believe he's referencing the idea that, personality-wise, there is no normal. Another way is to say that everyone has some variety and degree of crazy.
First, let me say that I'm a proponent of socialism.
Now, it's important to note the difference between "free" and "no cost to the user". Someone is still giving that doctor a salary, paying the pharmaceutical company for making the medicine, and the pharmacy for dispensing it.
We know for a fact that huge numbers of people watch low quality versions of movies for free, usually far more than buy tickets.
While that may be true, do you think these discerning 'potential customers' would pay even a dollar in a few months' time to watch DVD quality material, let alone over $10 to watch theatre-quality? And if you mean ripped movies, as opposed to screencams, the quality varies between VHS and Blu-Ray. And just because they'll watch crap for free doesn't mean they'll pay to see a higher-quality version.
Re:Other people's code? I can't even figure out mi
on
Code Is Not Literature
·
· Score: 1
Translation:
1: Don't code drunk.
2: Self documenting code isn't actually self documenting.
3: Non-self documenting code (hardware-specific strings/code) is also not self documenting.
Therefore, don't code while drunk, and comment your code. Even if it seems obvious, summarize any block of code, so when you come back to it months (or years!) later you'll have a clue of what it was supposed to do, and then maybe you'll be able to figure out what you were trying to do in the first place.
This is based on my experience of looking at code I wrote six months or more ago that worked perfectly fine but needed some new feature included. My rule of thumb nowadays is, "If a block of code is more than three lines long, it should be commented. If it's three lines or less long, it might need commenting, too.
Does he understand that Google Glasses are A CAMERA, and the movie theater prohibits the use of CAMERAS in the theater?
Emphasis mine.
It's been proven beyond a doubt that he didn't use his camera in the theatre.
Now think back a few years (5 or 10, I think), when merely having a camera in the theatre was against their rules? I think it's safe to assume that half the movie-goers today violate that now-defunct rule.
Yeah, it would be nice if the authorities would inform you of your legal rights rather than running roughshod over any individual who at least tries to be polite.
Slashdot Mirror
Investigations cost money. If the registrar is making $30 a year on a domain, it isn't going to be worth a formal investigation. They might be concerned about getting a reputation as an 'easy takedown.'
Good news! Someone figured out a way to make ignoring complaints cost a lot more than $30! So, the questions for them are: Do I want to pay $300k and not even look at the site; or do I spend the 5 minutes it would take next time as part of processing the complaint and save myself the court fees?
Yes, they only make $30/year from each person, but I doubt they get complaints equivalent to each of them, either. Having some poor bastard who drew the short straw review complaints for half a day each month wouldn't cut into those profits too much, and would go a long way to reducing unexpected legal fees.
Yes, and you could reasonably make a graphical interface for assembly language. Very simple tools with very simple connectors, mapping onto the real world (transistors, pins, registers, leads). The more abstract you get, the more explicit your instructions need to be to get reliable, reproducible, complex results. It's really hard to do that with predefined building blocks, unless part of your building block is a big chunk of very specific text, which sounds remarkably like code.
Another similar thing would be comparing movies to books. The richness, detail, and depth of a book just can't be done in film, in part because we don't want to sit there that long. But also, look at all the versions of a specific book that was done, each of which was done with the goal of being at least as good as the book, and how differently they turned out. This is something we don't want to have when we write code - we want the same results every time, with no limit to expression within the capabilities of the language/compiler/hardware/etc.
Another great example is language and writing itself. There's a reason the vast majority of the world went away from using pictures to describe concepts (words) - after a while you had a huge collection of pictures, and were still limited to doing more basic writing if you didn't have a clear idea of which picture referred to which concept. And so there was a decoupling between the concept (word) and the presentation of it (writing). C-A-T spells cat, but none of those parts have anything to do with the furry critter with pointy ears, whiskers, and a love for sleeping and chasing mice.
It's not that I think it would be impossible to make a visually mapped programming language, but the more abstract elements, particularly non-interface elements, would be just as difficult as they are today simply because they are abstract, difficult concepts.
Yep, I think you're right. And while I've used code I found on the web, first I review it, test it, and then test some modifications to make sure it's doing what I think it's doing.
And yes, it's really hard to tell how valuable jQuery is to his project.
You're a hero. I'd give you gold if this was reddit. And I had gold to give. I'd post anonymously and mod up, but I already commented here and I think the mod points on this comment are already maxed out.
Or the common libraries included with, but not integral to, your OS. Or the OS itself.
This sounds like the rantings of someone who would prefer to reinvent the wheel for every project. And then complain about maintaining all that one off code.
So, your alternative is to write all the code yourself? Where do you draw the line? "Standard" libraries? Who defines standard, and for what? As a note, this is why libraries were made - lots of commonly used functions of a particular nature kept in one place - not for some threshold that I have to use before it's acceptable. Just how many calls to math.h do I have to make before it's alright to include it instead of hand-coding it myself?
I'm not completely disagreeing with your thinking, and that app you had inflicted on you sounds terrible. Also, when space (RAM and HDD) were at a premium, I would agree more than now. Even with our vast amounts of RAM, this is still a good reason to keep libraries small, focused, and tight. But I'd rather have a library used for some complex task than rely on a developer maintaining the security of a lone application. There will be plenty of bugs without adding more risk.
That said, I'm mostly with Panasonic on this one. Big library for a smaller device (it's not a full-blown computer), probably with limited use for it's target developers. The reason they give is rather poor.
So, in short, they took the Windows 8 approach, and were surprised to get an identical response.
I've said it elsewhere, but it bears repeating. What gets rewarded gets done. They're rewarded for giving speeding tickets, not catching criminals. Hence, someone will be sitting on the street for 8 hours a day, but it will take an hour for a break-in to be responded to. Using speeding tickets as a padding to your police/city/municipal/regional budget is going to incentivize needless speed traps and keeping speed limits lower than what is recommended by traffic studies.
It seems to me that the FBI somehow keeps itself above this crap. Perhaps its because the DEA is so good at violating our rights that the FBI lets them do the dirty work. Perhaps it's because the FBI is too busy investigating murders, assaults, rapes, arson, thefts, and so on (you know, "real" crimes) that they don't have to resort to such depths to keep busy.
I know it's been a while, but have you heard of this guy Hoover?
Do you really think that if you broke into some house, stole a computer, found hundred of horrible child porn photos of the house owner molesting children and turned that in to the police it would be unusable?
Under normal rules, if a private citizen did that, it would be perfectly admissible. If they did it at the behest of the government, whether it be police, DA, or others, then it isn't.
Or, playing the think of the children card the other way, would you prefer the police to not be able to enter a house where a kidnapper is holding a child because they heard about it from a burglar of that house?
You do know that 25 KM is not a long distance, it's only 17 miles if you're not competent with metric measurements.
And only 15.5 miles if you are competent with Metric to English conversions.
I really think it's time we stopped picking on NASA engineers.
Maybe a better title would have been "Some shit happened in 773 AD and no one really knows what it is, but here's what we have so far!"
Don't quit your day job to be a headline copy editor.
Why not? Aim for the stars, hit the moon. I'm sure Slashdot hires new "editors" from time to time...
I'm no huge fan of powerpoint presentations, but clearly aesthetics are more important in learning how to use a tool to present your message in a visual manner than the logic or rationality of the message. It's almost as silly as teaching algebra in art class, just because ratios, perspectives and pleasing geometries have a mathematical basis.
Now, why debating, logic, critical thinking, and the scientific method aren't taught to at least a basic level is a good question. It just has nothing to do with powerpoint, or marketing in general. Which is a pity.
You'd think that part of the process would have been the child being adopted by the partner who didn't provide DNA (step-child adoption). At that point, his rights would be absolved, wouldn't they? I found this in a quick search. After a quick glance, it looks like they skipped Step 2.
Funny, when I look at this page what I see is that places with a high standard of living, i.e., those that can more easily afford luxuries, have lower piracy rates. Then there is the increasing prevalence of online streaming sites. Perhaps there are multiple causes of varying degrees of significance, but the laws haven't changed much in the last decade or so while the piracy rates have decreased.
Alternatively, he could have just not used the phrase "truly free", which it clearly isn't.
First, I think there are plenty of people who would jump through any number of hoops in order to have a normal dating life. Second, he definitely was mission-oriented, and successful, which will also be appealing to those who are wondering what to do to increase their dating pool and, therefore, their chance of finding a suitable mate.
Very good advice, and what I followed. Sure, people will be turned off, and there will be a lot of first dates/meetings. On the flip side, anyone who wants a second date has a much greater chance of being a viable partner than what you get by successfully putting up a facade on that first (second, third...) date.
But mixing crazy with crazy, that's a recipe for horror.
I believe he's referencing the idea that, personality-wise, there is no normal. Another way is to say that everyone has some variety and degree of crazy.
First, let me say that I'm a proponent of socialism.
Now, it's important to note the difference between "free" and "no cost to the user". Someone is still giving that doctor a salary, paying the pharmaceutical company for making the medicine, and the pharmacy for dispensing it.
Well, that sucks for the American companies. Not so much for non-American companies.
We know for a fact that huge numbers of people watch low quality versions of movies for free, usually far more than buy tickets.
While that may be true, do you think these discerning 'potential customers' would pay even a dollar in a few months' time to watch DVD quality material, let alone over $10 to watch theatre-quality? And if you mean ripped movies, as opposed to screencams, the quality varies between VHS and Blu-Ray. And just because they'll watch crap for free doesn't mean they'll pay to see a higher-quality version.
Translation:
1: Don't code drunk.
2: Self documenting code isn't actually self documenting.
3: Non-self documenting code (hardware-specific strings/code) is also not self documenting.
Therefore, don't code while drunk, and comment your code. Even if it seems obvious, summarize any block of code, so when you come back to it months (or years!) later you'll have a clue of what it was supposed to do, and then maybe you'll be able to figure out what you were trying to do in the first place.
This is based on my experience of looking at code I wrote six months or more ago that worked perfectly fine but needed some new feature included. My rule of thumb nowadays is, "If a block of code is more than three lines long, it should be commented. If it's three lines or less long, it might need commenting, too.
Does he understand that Google Glasses are A CAMERA, and the movie theater prohibits the use of CAMERAS in the theater?
Emphasis mine.
It's been proven beyond a doubt that he didn't use his camera in the theatre.
Now think back a few years (5 or 10, I think), when merely having a camera in the theatre was against their rules? I think it's safe to assume that half the movie-goers today violate that now-defunct rule.
Yeah, it would be nice if the authorities would inform you of your legal rights rather than running roughshod over any individual who at least tries to be polite.