please, for both of them, allow the user to choose and configure if it is "OK Cancel" or "Cancel OK". Disagreeing how to solve this is one thing, forcing it down the users throat and rendering his trained automatisms not only useless but counter-productive is a crime.
If yes, blame the idiots that voted those representatives into legislative power. What do you expect of a country where over 40% of the population believes that the beginning of the Genesis in the Bible is leterally and factually true?
Or more exactly: how is the age of a minor who does not exist determined?
And how does this protect any real children? And if, indeed, it does somehow protect children, why is the depiction of drug abuse, murder, torture, and other nastiness against adults and/or children perfectly legal? While speaking of it: is the depiction of slapping, beating, killing, torturing or otherwise non-sexually harming children in cartoons illegal too? If no, why not?
Finally: does this law also apply to underage furries, underage werewolves and underage aliens?
Is it possible to do automatic code migration?
on
Python 3.0 Released
·
· Score: 1
If the syntax differences and the differences in the standard library are well-documented, shouldn't it be possible to write a program that migrates 2.x code to 3.x code automatically? Does such a program exist?
> Okay. Luck caused me to work hard.... I repeat -- in your case, that might have caused you success. If you are not blind you will see that a lot of people work hard, maybe harder than you ever did and cannot even make ends meet or pay the operation of their kids. Maybe hard work is necessary (though I doubt it when I look at some of the rich people and how they earned their millions) but it certainly is not sufficient. I never said that your wealth or success is based on luck. I say, however, that in many cases it can be based on luck and in even more (99%) of the cases, NOT getting wealthy or successful is based on bad luck rather than a lack of willingness to work. I am honestly sick and tired of assholes who add insult to injury by supposing that those who did not manage to be successful are only responsible for their failures themselves. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Your response shows me that obviously, you prefer to tick it off as your achievement that circumstances made it possible for your hard work to actually let you achieve you a little bit. Fine. If it makes you feel nice and comfy to remain in your little bubble of cluelessness (that you so evidently proved to all of us by the nonsense you wrote about diabetes), be my guest.
But spare us the insulting idiocy of generalizing to others in that utterly idiotic and completely insight-free way, will you?
It is nonsense because luck plays a big role in personal success, no matter what you do. Luck can make you rich and luck can make you poor and luck can make you need a wheelchair. And it is nonsense because society (especially US society) does not give same opportunities to everyone. People do not have equal chances at all.
It has always been the politics of the conservative parties to keep up the myth you are spreading here and do as much as possible to not let solidarity happen: that what a really civilized society should be based on: to also let people live in dignity even if they had no luck and no oportunities. Instead the republicans have pumped millions and billions into wars banks and into the task of killing hundreds of thousands of civilians all over the worlds, while letting their own people hunger and go without even basic medical care.
I won't keep you from going on with jerking off to your own success, but doing someting about one's own life might be necessary but certainly is not sufficient to make one's life better or even worth to be called human.
Go around, open your eyes and talk to people and maybe, just maybe, you will start to understand.
You are missing the point. Nature doesn't give a shit about Earth being a dead and desert planet either. Nature does not give a shit about mass extinction nor total extinction. The point is that we should give a shit. Biodiversity is something that has both practical and an ideational values and judging from the problems we have run in in the past, we can expect it to have values we are not even aware of. At the same time we know that if we cause the extinction of species, this is the final word: we will never see them again and we will never get back the ecological systems they helped to form. So in addition to losing specific species that could be of value to us or just nice to look at, study, or just have, their extinction will go hand in had with losing a working biological system that itself is usually part of greater systems of climate, erosion etc. We are not even close to understanding and even less to predicting what will happen if such changes happen and we are utterly incapable of fixing it, once it has been broken. The comparison to the monkey species or any other species really is also missing one important point: no other species on earth as of yet was capable to make use of massive amounts of energy to influence their environment. While it has happened very often that species have caused the extinction of other species, sometimes of those they needed for their own survival, the scale of how humans are doing it now is unprecedented and can only be compared with the few occasions where mass extinctions occurred because of huge vulcanic or meteor incidents.
So while nature certainly doesnt give a fuck, I do and I think we all should, if we have an interest of our own species to survive over at least some more time in an environment that will remain a constant source of inspiration and wonder to us humans.
Or 4352342. "Calculating" any such number is not in hardly more scientific than throwing dice to figure it out. Sometimes I wish scientists wouldn't have this urge to make the impression of having a clue, when, quite obviously, the don't have a clue. Or, as in this case, provably cannot have a clue.
Now one knows yet how life came into being. Stop making calculations that require knowing that to even get close to meaningful numbers.
Maybe I am missing something here, but I find many recommendations made in here very strange: many argue that you should have no swap at all or just keep it very small. They argue that using swap would degrade performance. But I wouldn't one have to make a difference between just using swap to page out unneeded memory on the one hand and trashing on the other? If a single running application needs more memory at once than RAM is available, then pages need to get constantly swapped and that will case trashing and an unacceptable performance. But if you have a lot of applications just loaded that essentially only wait to get used eventually, I think it can make sense to let the OS swap the memory needed by them. Re-activating the memory might take a couple of seconds even, but then pages for some other application that has not been used for a longer while will get swapped out. No?
If they want to invest in lawyers instead of developers they should prepare to sue a lot of people and organizations all over the world. And that includes countries where there alleged basis for sueing does not even exist. I have had my issues with End Note before and I have long ago decided to avoid it like the devil. This move is just a little detail that reinforces my decision.
At least in my country, the traditional paper method works well, is easy to implement, and what is most important in a democracy: easy to understand and easy to check for everyone. No matter if the electronic method is opensource or not, only a very small percentage of voters will actually understand how it works, how it is kept secure and safe from manipulation. So what immense advantages would electronic voting have to make up for this fundamental problem, that will never change, no matter what the electronic solution will be?
That is not the important detail. The important detail is to talk to your kids so they understand how to not share email addresses (or real addresses or phone numbers, btw) and how to protect themselves. My kids have their addresses for about two years now and not a single spam email except for one or two chainletters passed on by their friends. They use Thunderbird and if spam starts to become a problem eventually they will probably start using the spamato spamfilter plugin.
The solution is not in the internets but in their brains.
In my opinion, being religious. let alone a priest, and being a scientist is not compatible unless one manages to keep up some odd kind of schizophrenia. I agree that discussing the flaws of creationism could be a good idea in a society where obviously a significant number of people think that creationism is an "alternative" to science.
A scientist who commits a serious blunder has to face reprisals such as this. If a mathematician claims that he found a method to trisect an angle he should be fired. What this man did, is at least a serious a blunder. Creationism contradicts the scientific principle.. if he feels like it, he still can become a priest or some other person who makes a living by believing in unprovable fairytales.
Any plugin or any crashing tab can crash the whole browser. But even more badly: any hanging plugin or hanging tab can cause all windows and all tabs to freeze. Its a known problem for years now. And yes, IE does this much better since version 7.
The louse multi-threading multi-processing has quite often made me mad: I often have dozens of tabs often, often with several windows. And it happens now and then that simply clicking a link will freeze all of them, simply because a plugin starts up slowly or some network activity blocks all activity in all tabs. Thats really lousy and it is sad that after all these years the situation is that bad (I can only talk about the Linux version of FF here as I nearly never use Windows).
still no decent process separation between tabs and plugins though. FF has a lot of work to do to catch up to Chrome (or even IE) in this respect. This problem has been known since years now and nothing has happened. They could also learn a thing or two about sandboxing from both IE and Chrome.
I have a related question: how to get started and learn about Java EE? I found it incredibly difficul to find my way through all the technologies and acronyms. And more importantly: i found it extremely hard to figure out what to use why when. There are many versions and many kinds of frameworks, often doing similar things and it is very hard to decide which ones to give a closer look.
This is especially relevant when one tries to figure out why to use which of the many frameworks to quickly get a web application running.
Are there any good online tutorials and online introductory articles that are up to date? (many articles by Sun and other sources seem to be too dated to really be a good basis for what to look into now).
Multiprocessing, or rather the lack thereof, is one of the biggest weaknesses of FF. To put it differently: FF still sucks incredibly in that respect. One can still end up with all browser windows becoming unresponsive because of some action in one tab. Or all browser windows and tabs crashing because of one problematic plugin.
I am really looking forward to this - if only to see the FF developers struggle and invest some of the Google money into getting this aspect of their browser improved finally.
Oh by doing this they gain all the sympathy to make terrorism against Americans and the western world a thing of the past. God bless America and peole like Bush who set an example of how to live the true Christian values and handle conflict in a truely Christian manner.
luckily there are countries where this kind of barbarism is not done anymore. It is not helping to defeat violence in a society if the state itself is conducting violence and killings in the name of revenge. How about some extra torture before killing the delinquent?
I wonder if the US will ever get out of the dark ages and ban the death penalty or if their citizens will go on to demand that this barbaric ritual of revenge can be carried out so that their low instincts can be satisfied.
Slashdot Mirror
please, for both of them, allow the user to choose and configure if it is "OK Cancel" or "Cancel OK". Disagreeing how to solve this is one thing, forcing it down the users throat and rendering his trained automatisms not only useless but counter-productive is a crime.
to call quantum entanglement "teleportation".
If yes, blame the idiots that voted those representatives into legislative power. What do you expect of a country where over 40% of the population believes that the beginning of the Genesis in the Bible is leterally and factually true?
Or more exactly: how is the age of a minor who does not exist determined?
And how does this protect any real children? And if, indeed, it does somehow protect children, why is the depiction of drug abuse, murder, torture, and other nastiness against adults and/or children perfectly legal?
While speaking of it: is the depiction of slapping, beating, killing, torturing or otherwise non-sexually harming children in cartoons illegal too? If no, why not?
Finally: does this law also apply to underage furries, underage werewolves and underage aliens?
How is this http://phrogram.com/content//featurecomparison.aspx "free"?
As it comes from MS, it is not open and not portable either.
Bad choice.
OK, never mind, I just saw it, there seems to be such a beast: http://docs.python.org/dev/3.0/library/2to3.html#to3-reference
If the syntax differences and the differences in the standard library are well-documented, shouldn't it be possible to write a program that migrates 2.x code to 3.x code automatically? Does such a program exist?
> Okay. Luck caused me to work hard. ...
I repeat -- in your case, that might have caused you success. If you are not blind you will see that a lot of people work hard, maybe harder than you ever did and cannot even make ends meet or pay the operation of their kids. Maybe hard work is necessary (though I doubt it when I look at some of the rich people and how they earned their millions) but it certainly is not sufficient.
I never said that your wealth or success is based on luck. I say, however, that in many cases it can be based on luck and in even more (99%) of the cases, NOT getting wealthy or successful is based on bad luck rather than a lack of willingness to work. I am honestly sick and tired of assholes who add insult to injury by supposing that those who did not manage to be successful are only responsible for their failures themselves. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Your response shows me that obviously, you prefer to tick it off as your achievement that circumstances made it possible for your hard work to actually let you achieve you a little bit. Fine. If it makes you feel nice and comfy to remain in your little bubble of cluelessness (that you so evidently proved to all of us by the nonsense you wrote about diabetes), be my guest.
But spare us the insulting idiocy of generalizing to others in that utterly idiotic and completely insight-free way, will you?
It is nonsense because luck plays a big role in personal success, no matter what you do. Luck can make you rich and luck can make you poor and luck can make you need a wheelchair. And it is nonsense because society (especially US society) does not give same opportunities to everyone. People do not have equal chances at all.
It has always been the politics of the conservative parties to keep up the myth you are spreading here and do as much as possible to not let solidarity happen: that what a really civilized society should be based on: to also let people live in dignity even if they had no luck and no oportunities.
Instead the republicans have pumped millions and billions into wars banks and into the task of killing hundreds of thousands of civilians all over the worlds, while letting their own people hunger and go without even basic medical care.
I won't keep you from going on with jerking off to your own success, but doing someting about one's own life might be necessary but certainly is not sufficient to make one's life better or even worth to be called human.
Go around, open your eyes and talk to people and maybe, just maybe, you will start to understand.
You are missing the point. Nature doesn't give a shit about Earth being a dead and desert planet either. Nature does not give a shit about mass extinction nor total extinction. The point is that we should give a shit.
Biodiversity is something that has both practical and an ideational values and judging from the problems we have run in in the past, we can expect it to have values we are not even aware of. At the same time we know that if we cause the extinction of species, this is the final word: we will never see them again and we will never get back the ecological systems they helped to form. So in addition to losing specific species that could be of value to us or just nice to look at, study, or just have, their extinction will go hand in had with losing a working biological system that itself is usually part of greater systems of climate, erosion etc. We are not even close to understanding and even less to predicting what will happen if such changes happen and we are utterly incapable of fixing it, once it has been broken.
The comparison to the monkey species or any other species really is also missing one important point: no other species on earth as of yet was capable to make use of massive amounts of energy to influence their environment. While it has happened very often that species have caused the extinction of other species, sometimes of those they needed for their own survival, the scale of how humans are doing it now is unprecedented and can only be compared with the few occasions where mass extinctions occurred because of huge vulcanic or meteor incidents.
So while nature certainly doesnt give a fuck, I do and I think we all should, if we have an interest of our own species to survive over at least some more time in an environment that will remain a constant source of inspiration and wonder to us humans.
Or 4352342. "Calculating" any such number is not in hardly more scientific than throwing dice to figure it out. Sometimes I wish scientists wouldn't have this urge to make the impression of having a clue, when, quite obviously, the don't have a clue. Or, as in this case, provably cannot have a clue.
Now one knows yet how life came into being. Stop making calculations that require knowing that to even get close to meaningful numbers.
that humans are dumb, not that machines are becoming intelligent.
Maybe I am missing something here, but I find many recommendations made in here very strange: many argue that you should have no swap at all or just keep it very small. They argue that using swap would degrade performance.
But I wouldn't one have to make a difference between just using swap to page out unneeded memory on the one hand and trashing on the other?
If a single running application needs more memory at once than RAM is available, then pages need to get constantly swapped and that will case trashing and an unacceptable performance.
But if you have a lot of applications just loaded that essentially only wait to get used eventually, I think it can make sense to let the OS swap the memory needed by them. Re-activating the memory might take a couple of seconds even, but then pages for some other application that has not been used for a longer while will get swapped out.
No?
If they want to invest in lawyers instead of developers they should prepare to sue a lot of people and organizations all over the world. And that includes countries where there alleged basis for sueing does not even exist.
I have had my issues with End Note before and I have long ago decided to avoid it like the devil. This move is just a little detail that reinforces my decision.
At least in my country, the traditional paper method works well, is easy to implement, and what is most important in a democracy: easy to understand and easy to check for everyone.
No matter if the electronic method is opensource or not, only a very small percentage of voters will actually understand how it works, how it is kept secure and safe from manipulation.
So what immense advantages would electronic voting have to make up for this fundamental problem, that will never change, no matter what the electronic solution will be?
That is not the important detail. The important detail is to talk to your kids so they understand how to not share email addresses (or real addresses or phone numbers, btw) and how to protect themselves. My kids have their addresses for about two years now and not a single spam email except for one or two chainletters passed on by their friends.
They use Thunderbird and if spam starts to become a problem eventually they will probably start using the spamato spamfilter plugin.
The solution is not in the internets but in their brains.
In my opinion, being religious. let alone a priest, and being a scientist is not compatible unless one manages to keep up some odd kind of schizophrenia.
I agree that discussing the flaws of creationism could be a good idea in a society where obviously a significant number of people think that creationism is an "alternative" to science.
A scientist who commits a serious blunder has to face reprisals such as this. If a mathematician claims that he found a method to trisect an angle he should be fired. What this man did, is at least a serious a blunder. .. if he feels like it, he still can become a priest or some other person who makes a living by believing in unprovable fairytales.
Creationism contradicts the scientific principle
Any plugin or any crashing tab can crash the whole browser. But even more badly: any hanging plugin or hanging tab can cause all windows and all tabs to freeze.
Its a known problem for years now.
And yes, IE does this much better since version 7.
The louse multi-threading multi-processing has quite often made me mad: I often have dozens of tabs often, often with several windows. And it happens now and then that simply clicking a link will freeze all of them, simply because a plugin starts up slowly or some network activity blocks all activity in all tabs.
Thats really lousy and it is sad that after all these years the situation is that bad (I can only talk about the Linux version of FF here as I nearly never use Windows).
still no decent process separation between tabs and plugins though. FF has a lot of work to do to catch up to Chrome (or even IE) in this respect. This problem has been known since years now and nothing has happened.
They could also learn a thing or two about sandboxing from both IE and Chrome.
I have a related question: how to get started and learn about Java EE? I found it incredibly difficul to find my way through all the technologies and acronyms. And more importantly: i found it extremely hard to figure out what to use why when.
There are many versions and many kinds of frameworks, often doing similar things and it is very hard to decide which ones to give a closer look.
This is especially relevant when one tries to figure out why to use which of the many frameworks to quickly get a web application running.
Are there any good online tutorials and online introductory articles that are up to date? (many articles by Sun and other sources seem to be too dated to really be a good basis for what to look into now).
Multiprocessing, or rather the lack thereof, is one of the biggest weaknesses of FF. To put it differently: FF still sucks incredibly in that respect. One can still end up with all browser windows becoming unresponsive because of some action in one tab. Or all browser windows and tabs crashing because of one problematic plugin.
I am really looking forward to this - if only to see the FF developers struggle and invest some of the Google money into getting this aspect of their browser improved finally.
Oh by doing this they gain all the sympathy to make terrorism against Americans and the western world a thing of the past.
God bless America and peole like Bush who set an example of how to live the true Christian values and handle conflict in a truely Christian manner.
luckily there are countries where this kind of barbarism is not done anymore. It is not helping to defeat violence in a society if the state itself is conducting violence and killings in the name of revenge.
How about some extra torture before killing the delinquent?
I wonder if the US will ever get out of the dark ages and ban the death penalty or if their citizens will go on to demand that this barbaric ritual of revenge can be carried out so that their low instincts can be satisfied.