Guys guys (reffering to sibling comments)! You misunderstood this. He knows very well that two of those are the one side of the spoiler-able extreme, and the other two are the other extreme. That was kinda his point.
He spent NINE freakin YEARS in a prison! Ask yourself this one question: How many years of your life equal $9 million? When would you consider it being forgiven?
To me personally, one single year of my life is worth more than those 9 million.
Additionally, physical reality has no concept called "guilt". It's just cause and effect. So what causes made this happen? And what causes made that happen? And so on, until the beginning of all time. Should we therefore punish the big bang, because we did not look further backwards?? I can forgive murderer, rapists, real terrorists, politicians, evil corporate people, weapon and drug dealers, and everyone else. Because I know that in the end, we're all just the result of what happened to us. And every single one of those people, can become or be someone good again, even after the worst things. If the world around him supports it.
Did anyone else notice that the domain of Voltage Labs, from the old article, is gone, and replaced by a domain squatter? The "find something interesting" type.
Wow. I guess they were very successful.;)
Re:is there any other way to prevent crowd dispers
on
Revisiting DIY HERF Guns
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
The process you're referring to is called "buying" and is done by lobbies. Voting is just a facade, because it does not matter who you vote for. Nearly everyone on the list is already bought. The rest is pushed out by not having tons of financed marketing.
I say: Build your own community. Your own state. And make yourself as independent as possible. Especially from the cattle that still vote those strawmen.
Exactly. Top Gear is about fun and entertainment. And they're doing a very good job in that department!
Fifth Gear is the boring but useful relative.
It's like with women: They need the latter, but they love the first one. And while the second one helps as much as he cans, just to be loved, the first one is loved specifically because he is exciting rather than useful. Poor Fifth Gear. Will he ever realize what the problem is?;)
And hey, then I will use that rule too, and make the company who owns a street legally responsible for the crimes that happen on it. And the owner of a house for the things happening in it. Etc. That thing cuts both ways. Just that my side has a thousand blades, while theirs hasn't even a had full.
I agree that classic cars have (emotional) value for most of us.
But your argument makes no sense. By that rule, child raping chainsaw murdering Arabian black Jewish gay Nazi women would be the best, and make us smile the most, because they are so rare.;)
It rather is, because they are a piece of old art. Designs that you can't buy anymore. Technology that shows us what we once did badly or even better.
There's no reason to not include the crash test into that beauty.
I'm no (so-called) "expert", but what strikes you as the most outstanding difference between summer and winter? Hmm? Hmm?
S-freakin-UN. SUN! And as it is already shown, that lack of sunlight causes depression, imagine what it is for a baby, to in the first months of their life think that there is no other thing than darkness and coldness! I mean, it boggles my mind, how that can be not totally obvious to someone... I am a fall child, and my first month of life consisted of laying mostly inside, and seeing hailstorms and rain outside. And I always had a special relationship to that weather.
If you know how the brain works, by forming very global and basic patterns at first, and then making finer and finer details in it, then this is the base imprint of your character right there. Oh, and besides: There's your explanation for the patterns of similarity in humans, based on their time of birth (part of what is called "zodiac signs"/"astrology").
How so? Did you somehow miss that ominous fourth dimension called TIME? With its effects like the effect always coming *after* the cause? Just have one filming the transformation of the crowd, and then sue the city for willingly and deliberately causing chaos and destruction, by mass-assaulting people on the level of torture. (That wording should help.)
Uuum, all those things you list, are actually crimes, and in a working state, it does not matter if it's a cop. You could sue the guy doing it, and the persons commanding him for organized mass assault. Throw in a wording that combines "weapons of mass destruction" with "torture", get it out the right way, and you will have the media all over them and with you.
But I think this was your point. I still wanted to clarify that.
Ah, I see. So if you happen to be at a peaceful protest, and some asses start smashing windows, etc, it's OK to blast your ears out, and taze you?
For that point of view, I should taze you right now. Would help with remembering it.:P Unfortunately this would make me no better, so I have to hope this suffices.
That's the worst thing about the "wars" nowadays. Countries like the US mostly (not exclusively, but mostly) just push buttons and watch screens and data. A cruise missile is such an example. You select the "target" (note the lack of mentioning that this is a place where real humans live, with partners and children thinking of them, etc), you press fire, and the target is "destroyed" (note the lack of "ripping live humans to shreds, destroying their *existence*, or making them *die* very painful and slowly").
I wish some aliens would just place a big cannon in space, and every time somebody is murdered, the murderer and only the murderer is annihilated. Letting a AI/robot do it, would only result in the creator of that machine being annihilated. No exceptions. No misses. Nobody would be overlooked. Then wars would be over in an instant.
Unfortunately the whole thing is much harder for other crimes, like lie-based tricks.
Some also say, that the reason for this, is to artificially throw people into debts they can't repay, so they work harder in their hamster wheels. All for the good of the upper 0.01% of the people. And in terms of evolution and nature, is makes perfect sense. You want all the resources (inclusive human ones), and your mindset and genes to be the only surviving. Kinda like really big time asshole natural selection.
The problem is, that in the long run, they are killing us with it. And this means that they are killing themselves and their whole goal too. But what is that, in the eyes of short-term greed?:/
The good thing is, that it's actually pretty easy to get out of the hamster wheel: Stop using their money. Yes, it is very hard if done alone. But think of the smallest town that could sustain itself completely, and still have what you need. (Which even without compromises is less than you think.) Now you have the number of people that you'd need to get out of it *without* any real changes in your life (except for moving). If you accept small changes at first, then that number drastically goes down.
Every single bill is actually a debt of someone else. That's how it works. (Look at what's written on the dollar bills, if you don't believe me.) Without using their money... their economic ups and downs have no meanings to you. A quick drop-in replacement is gold and silver. Everyone takes them, if he knows they are real. And when done right, the worse the economy is, the more you can buy.
Ha. At this point, people usually realize, how handy is is, that some big banks have their huge reserves in *gold*: 1. Get rid of all your money. 2. Make the economy crash. 3. Buy everything that's worth something with your gold. 4. Profit.
Why should only they do it? You can do it too. Just pay attention to the fact, that to buy gold with paper money, when your paper money *already* is worth nothing, is not such a good idea.;)
That does not necessarily mean what you are implying.
If I write the test, I always have a clear interface definition of the module's interface I'm testing. And I'm specifically writing the test in a way, that it fills all possibilities in the range of possible input for that interface. Even if they make no sense at all. As long as the data type supports it, oh yeah, you can expect me to fire it at your code! Ofter I write some kind of fuzzer, with some fixed input data for special cases (like all extremes of a data type / structure), and a good load of fuzzing in-between.
So on the long run, any bug, even when using the interface in a nonstandard way, is pretty quickly found. Usually I often already find bugs in the definition- or implementation-dependent range of allowed interface input data while I'm writing the test. Now that I think of it... I actually do switch my mindset... to a cracker mode. Trying to break the interface and bring it down to its knees. In a multithreaded environment, I also fuzz the timings, and intentionally try if I can do them in the wrong way.
A proper interface should make all this bad implementations impossible, or at least go into a defined state.
P.S.: The best way to find holes in an interface, is to look for "undefined state" in the specification. In big things, there are tons of those.
That's because unit tests are the only piece in that box of shit candy, that is actually making sense. Ok, patterns can be used with caution, if you don't just slap them on every problem like a cookie cutter, and never feel any urge to stay close to the pattern for no reason. But the rest? Try it in my team, (don't stop doing it,) and you're fired.
My god, where do they live? In the land before time? What is described, is the age-old pseudo-dichotomy of the programmer who first plans everything, and then codes it, and the amateur, who throws together some spaghetti code that barely works, but gets the pat on the back from management, for being faster. While the planning programmer then gets negative comments, when taking so long to add functions to the 1.1 version.
The point is, that for big projects both strategies don't work well. The first one, because management or clients are a bunch of children, who don't know what they want, until the project is done, and let you completely change directions more often then there are minor version numbers available. (A result of reactive planning, which is reversing the steps of natural planning, on management's side.) And the second one, results, as I said, in a hard to maintain mess.
But we are long out of this dark times. I think it's pretty much standard nowadays, to work in the spiral model. A method which now is more than two decades old! You define the biggest risks/problems/questions, you plan and develop a prototype, using test-driven development and as little work as possible, you answer your questions, and then repeat the whole process. Until you reach the "good enough" state.
So proper planning and "good enough" are no opposites, as made-up in the "article", but indeed an old hat, know to work best when correctly combined.
But what did I expect from a site, where a third of the articles are advertisements in disguise, a third are made-up false dichotomies, and the other third are badly written and misinterpreted actual news.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey does that mean that you think Stephen Hawking sounds like Kermit the Frog gone techno? Because that guy normally talks like that!
Don't insult the H! Allright? ;)
Guys guys (reffering to sibling comments)! You misunderstood this. He knows very well that two of those are the one side of the spoiler-able extreme, and the other two are the other extreme. That was kinda his point.
So WHOOOSHHH to all of you! :D
___
P.S.: No, I don't drive a Prius. Why?
He spent NINE freakin YEARS in a prison! Ask yourself this one question: How many years of your life equal $9 million? When would you consider it being forgiven?
To me personally, one single year of my life is worth more than those 9 million.
Additionally, physical reality has no concept called "guilt". It's just cause and effect. So what causes made this happen? And what causes made that happen? And so on, until the beginning of all time. Should we therefore punish the big bang, because we did not look further backwards??
I can forgive murderer, rapists, real terrorists, politicians, evil corporate people, weapon and drug dealers, and everyone else. Because I know that in the end, we're all just the result of what happened to us. And every single one of those people, can become or be someone good again, even after the worst things. If the world around him supports it.
So I'm trying to do my part. Do you?
Or will it become like Yahoo Answers?
Did anyone else notice that the domain of Voltage Labs, from the old article, is gone, and replaced by a domain squatter? The "find something interesting" type.
Wow. I guess they were very successful. ;)
The process you're referring to is called "buying" and is done by lobbies. Voting is just a facade, because it does not matter who you vote for. Nearly everyone on the list is already bought.
The rest is pushed out by not having tons of financed marketing.
I say: Build your own community. Your own state. And make yourself as independent as possible. Especially from the cattle that still vote those strawmen.
That's freakin' ILLEGAL! It's mass-assault! Don't act as if it were something normal or even OK.
Some plainclothes cops in that crowd starting a riot, does not change that.
Exactly. Top Gear is about fun and entertainment. And they're doing a very good job in that department!
Fifth Gear is the boring but useful relative.
It's like with women: They need the latter, but they love the first one. And while the second one helps as much as he cans, just to be loved, the first one is loved specifically because he is exciting rather than useful. Poor Fifth Gear. Will he ever realize what the problem is? ;)
No. Because of Vivendi.
And hey, then I will use that rule too, and make the company who owns a street legally responsible for the crimes that happen on it. And the owner of a house for the things happening in it. Etc.
That thing cuts both ways. Just that my side has a thousand blades, while theirs hasn't even a had full.
And you expected what? ;)
I think such a device is called a "scanner" :P
You seem to have missed the episode, where they tested ultra-cheap east-asian cars, at below $10,000.
Depending on your point of view, you could even count the dog-sled that they went to the freakin' *north pole* with!
Have you seen the pictures? He would only have jumped again, if they would have attached his upper body to a bouncing ball.
I agree that classic cars have (emotional) value for most of us.
But your argument makes no sense. By that rule, child raping chainsaw murdering Arabian black Jewish gay Nazi women would be the best, and make us smile the most, because they are so rare. ;)
It rather is, because they are a piece of old art. Designs that you can't buy anymore. Technology that shows us what we once did badly or even better.
There's no reason to not include the crash test into that beauty.
Oooh, yooz no eeted it!
kthxbye!
P.S.: See, even the cats notice it!
Well you know... some animals are more equal...
I'm no (so-called) "expert", but what strikes you as the most outstanding difference between summer and winter? Hmm? Hmm?
S-freakin-UN. SUN! And as it is already shown, that lack of sunlight causes depression, imagine what it is for a baby, to in the first months of their life think that there is no other thing than darkness and coldness!
I mean, it boggles my mind, how that can be not totally obvious to someone...
I am a fall child, and my first month of life consisted of laying mostly inside, and seeing hailstorms and rain outside. And I always had a special relationship to that weather.
If you know how the brain works, by forming very global and basic patterns at first, and then making finer and finer details in it, then this is the base imprint of your character right there.
Oh, and besides: There's your explanation for the patterns of similarity in humans, based on their time of birth (part of what is called "zodiac signs"/"astrology").
How so? Did you somehow miss that ominous fourth dimension called TIME? With its effects like the effect always coming *after* the cause?
Just have one filming the transformation of the crowd, and then sue the city for willingly and deliberately causing chaos and destruction, by mass-assaulting people on the level of torture. (That wording should help.)
Uuum, all those things you list, are actually crimes, and in a working state, it does not matter if it's a cop. You could sue the guy doing it, and the persons commanding him for organized mass assault. Throw in a wording that combines "weapons of mass destruction" with "torture", get it out the right way, and you will have the media all over them and with you.
But I think this was your point. I still wanted to clarify that.
Ah, I see. So if you happen to be at a peaceful protest, and some asses start smashing windows, etc, it's OK to blast your ears out, and taze you?
For that point of view, I should taze you right now. Would help with remembering it. :P
Unfortunately this would make me no better, so I have to hope this suffices.
That's the worst thing about the "wars" nowadays. Countries like the US mostly (not exclusively, but mostly) just push buttons and watch screens and data. A cruise missile is such an example.
You select the "target" (note the lack of mentioning that this is a place where real humans live, with partners and children thinking of them, etc), you press fire, and the target is "destroyed" (note the lack of "ripping live humans to shreds, destroying their *existence*, or making them *die* very painful and slowly").
I wish some aliens would just place a big cannon in space, and every time somebody is murdered, the murderer and only the murderer is annihilated. Letting a AI/robot do it, would only result in the creator of that machine being annihilated. No exceptions. No misses. Nobody would be overlooked.
Then wars would be over in an instant.
Unfortunately the whole thing is much harder for other crimes, like lie-based tricks.
Some also say, that the reason for this, is to artificially throw people into debts they can't repay, so they work harder in their hamster wheels. All for the good of the upper 0.01% of the people. And in terms of evolution and nature, is makes perfect sense. You want all the resources (inclusive human ones), and your mindset and genes to be the only surviving. Kinda like really big time asshole natural selection.
The problem is, that in the long run, they are killing us with it. And this means that they are killing themselves and their whole goal too. But what is that, in the eyes of short-term greed? :/
The good thing is, that it's actually pretty easy to get out of the hamster wheel: Stop using their money.
Yes, it is very hard if done alone. But think of the smallest town that could sustain itself completely, and still have what you need. (Which even without compromises is less than you think.)
Now you have the number of people that you'd need to get out of it *without* any real changes in your life (except for moving). If you accept small changes at first, then that number drastically goes down.
Every single bill is actually a debt of someone else. That's how it works. (Look at what's written on the dollar bills, if you don't believe me.)
Without using their money... their economic ups and downs have no meanings to you. A quick drop-in replacement is gold and silver. Everyone takes them, if he knows they are real. And when done right, the worse the economy is, the more you can buy.
Ha. At this point, people usually realize, how handy is is, that some big banks have their huge reserves in *gold*:
1. Get rid of all your money.
2. Make the economy crash.
3. Buy everything that's worth something with your gold.
4. Profit.
Why should only they do it? You can do it too. Just pay attention to the fact, that to buy gold with paper money, when your paper money *already* is worth nothing, is not such a good idea. ;)
That does not necessarily mean what you are implying.
If I write the test, I always have a clear interface definition of the module's interface I'm testing. And I'm specifically writing the test in a way, that it fills all possibilities in the range of possible input for that interface. Even if they make no sense at all. As long as the data type supports it, oh yeah, you can expect me to fire it at your code!
Ofter I write some kind of fuzzer, with some fixed input data for special cases (like all extremes of a data type / structure), and a good load of fuzzing in-between.
So on the long run, any bug, even when using the interface in a nonstandard way, is pretty quickly found. Usually I often already find bugs in the definition- or implementation-dependent range of allowed interface input data while I'm writing the test. Now that I think of it... I actually do switch my mindset... to a cracker mode. Trying to break the interface and bring it down to its knees.
In a multithreaded environment, I also fuzz the timings, and intentionally try if I can do them in the wrong way.
A proper interface should make all this bad implementations impossible, or at least go into a defined state.
P.S.: The best way to find holes in an interface, is to look for "undefined state" in the specification. In big things, there are tons of those.
That's because unit tests are the only piece in that box of shit candy, that is actually making sense. Ok, patterns can be used with caution, if you don't just slap them on every problem like a cookie cutter, and never feel any urge to stay close to the pattern for no reason. But the rest? Try it in my team, (don't stop doing it,) and you're fired.
My god, where do they live? In the land before time? What is described, is the age-old pseudo-dichotomy of the programmer who first plans everything, and then codes it, and the amateur, who throws together some spaghetti code that barely works, but gets the pat on the back from management, for being faster. While the planning programmer then gets negative comments, when taking so long to add functions to the 1.1 version.
The point is, that for big projects both strategies don't work well. The first one, because management or clients are a bunch of children, who don't know what they want, until the project is done, and let you completely change directions more often then there are minor version numbers available. (A result of reactive planning, which is reversing the steps of natural planning, on management's side.) And the second one, results, as I said, in a hard to maintain mess.
But we are long out of this dark times. I think it's pretty much standard nowadays, to work in the spiral model. A method which now is more than two decades old!
You define the biggest risks/problems/questions, you plan and develop a prototype, using test-driven development and as little work as possible, you answer your questions, and then repeat the whole process. Until you reach the "good enough" state.
So proper planning and "good enough" are no opposites, as made-up in the "article", but indeed an old hat, know to work best when correctly combined.
But what did I expect from a site, where a third of the articles are advertisements in disguise, a third are made-up false dichotomies, and the other third are badly written and misinterpreted actual news.