Well, "cervical" was an unknown term for me, as it is non-existing in German, and English is my third language. Isn't it just a doctor's term in English too? (Honest question.)
But you can exchange the word by any other foreign word. You still get my point, don't you?:)
While JavaScript is not perfect, it is actually a nice little language. It's just that every retard can "program" in it, and then thinks because he wrote a for loop, he is entitled to an opinion about it.
Few people actually know how to program properly in JS. And the only problem is that JS is too forgiving. Just as the rendering engines for (X)HTML and CSS. But that was the original point. And it's not that bad of a point either.
Because simple scripts are way easier than people think. Every person who can play a shooter, puzzle game, or configure some stuff on his computer, can write acceptable scripts. And even total noobs can write bad ones. I think that is a nice thing.
And this is why you can ignore the (non-pro) masses, ranting about JS.
If it were for me, the scripting interface in browsers would have to support multiple high-level languages anyway: Python, Haskell, Java and Ruby would be those that I'd introduce. But others might want Erlang, Ocaml, and maybe even C++. Why not? If the API is clean, the interpreters work as expected, and everything is sandboxed as it should anyway...
If only they were ergonomic. (Protip: All MS [or Logitech, or pretty much all others] keyboards without any exception are not ergonomic. They just look as if they were.)
Give me a DataHand Pro II with an integrated 6-axis orb/ball for one hand, and pressure sensitive keys, below $200 for both hands, and you got a ton of clients!
This read to me like a mix of "cerveau" (the french word for "brain") and "vagina". And for a moment, I wondered if this is like thinking with the penis?;)
Why do doctors always have to use foreign words, when we have perfectly good native words? It feels very arrogant, like the Latin bibles, etc. The worst thing is, that in non-English languages, English world are added too. So you end up with whole sentence that do not contain one native word. And when you look the words up, yo notice that you can construct that entire sentence with native words only, without a loss of any meaning.
To me it really is just an aspect of the "god complex" of the "gods in white".:/
P.S.: I know that the people in TFA are more scientists. But the point is still true.
I just won the web economy bullshit bingo! What I will do with the money I won?
Syndicate with talented fixed-cost do-able domestic model uniques, to leverage and scale my verticals, until acquisition for branding, and then reach the turnaround, of course!
Sorry, but you apparently never understood what HTML it. Is is a purely semantic language. Maybe you started to use it when it wasn't, and so never made the evolutionary step. Which is ok, if you aren't really building pages.
The <del> tag has no visual representation whatsoever associated with it. Just as any other HTML tag. If you think about layout for even a second, while writing HTML, your web developer license (if you have one) is automatically revoked. ^^
The browser can decide to display it however it wants. It can even not be displayed at all, but output a series of farts of a monkey listening to sounds created from the HTML and dancing wildly inside a large box of food. If you disagree, use CSS.:)
Your example would make more sense this way: <del cite="http://some.url/explanation.html" datetime="2009-08-07T03:07:05+0200" hint="content that has been deleted at $datetime from the document, because of $cite">...</del>
But you forget the final connection. Why is it retarded? Because someone makes it to work that way. It's a great system for those that profit from it.
As I said earlier, it's the problem of revolving door and lobbies, or else the patent office would long be changed.
You really need to update your constitution. (But not the bad way.) Plan very very wisely, take out the old guillotine, and storm DC. (Warning: If you in that process become what you hate, you fail! And the risk of this happening is extremely high. Hence the planning.)
No. The real problem is, that it was granted in the first place. And the real reason is, that the patent offices works under the control of a government, that has more revolving doors and "lobbys"* than the Internet Explorer has quirks, holes and bugs.
___ * Which suddenly became the word for an euphemistic view on the illegal bribery and disloyalty to the people, which in many countries are major crimes on the punishment level of murder.
They don't need a list. It's everything. And everything not.
Or in simpler words: Think for yourself. Never ever take a pill, without knowing *exactly* how it works, and either studies from people you personally trust, or taking the risk.
Turns out, you *need* nearly no medication at all. Eat really healthy (organic and as little processed as possible, and really tasty at the same time!), exercise, live in a healthy environment (just as much mental as physical), and you are going to be fine, and get old in a nice way. That's really how easy it is!
You only need medication in rare cases, like antibiotics, in life-threatening situations or in case of an injury. Then it's worth the trade-off. Oh, and of course there are genetic problems, that we still can't fix right in the genetics. So you may have to help yourself out with them too.
I agree, but you must realize, that there is so such thing as "unbiased" anything. By basic physical definition. It is completely impossible.
What we call "bias", is what does not fit with our world view, and/or that you don't agree with. Of course our world view may make more sense in a physics-based way.;) (Don't worry, I'm on your side. I think FOX is the craziest group of crazy people ever seen on TV, except maybe for North Korea.) But still, that's how it is.
Maybe this will help you think about it in a more productive way, than to call others "biased", while assuming you are not.:)
If you want to do something good*, do it Socrates-style and lead people into arguing against their own world view, until it becomes unsustainable. Then offer them an advantage in self-confidence when they "upgrade" to the new better world view. Everybody denies attacks to his world view. But nobody denies an upgrade in self-confidence.:)
___ * Unfortunately, "good" is also relative. So "good" is by definition, what's good for you. (Also indirectly trough your community.) But often this is far from good for others, even if you think it is. So either be fair even to their "sick and twisted" reality, because you respect every human. Or go full throttle, and make world better for *you*. Choose the one that gives the biggest evolutionary advantages to the one you want to have them.:)
But you know nothing about the psychology of this. I'll tell you a story that started just like this:
There was a time, when every German SMS service on the net was free. They only added 20 characters of advertisement. We (when I say "we", I mean, that I was a developer who was assigned as a backup for that web service) were very "successful" in that business, because our SMS provider, handy.de, got payed in advertisements on our site! (Or in other words: they payed to be able to pay!) But then, handy.de got into trouble, and so got our competition. So everyone started offering less SMS per day, with less characters, only if you register, and so on. Which of course did not help at all. So pay-only services started to pop up. Often with parallel ad-based, but very restricted, services. handy.de continued to offer those free SMS. And was the first to declare bankruptcy. Then all the other ad-based services died, were canceled, or offered unreasonable things, like 1000 free SMS a day, in *total*. Soon there were *only* pay-only services. And they survived. Because the users simply had no other choice than to use them. There were no usable free services left.
The morale of the story: When one person starts it, soon all the others will follow. Maybe the first one or two will die. But in the end, everyone will do it, and nobody offering it for free will be left. Because they have to, and also *because they think that now they can*! So soon, you may not be left with any free choice. And then you will pay. Or nobody will care. Because frankly, work *really* is not free!
But I agree that Murdoch, with his low-quality stuff will not survive, if he chooses an unacceptable price. Which right now still is everything above free, for services that you can get for free. But soon it will be a real money value.
I guess they will go with something totally unrealistic, like $1 per article, when they could still make good money, and have actual paying people, when offering an article for something like $0.001, or even less. (Shhh, don't tell Verizon. It will only confuse them.;)
And who will then either... 1)...tell you that it's not his job, to fix your little problems! (Actually happened to a friend of mine!) 2)...come over, find nothing, and bill you for making a prank call. 3)...run out of your house with as much stolen stuff as he can carry.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, "cervical" was an unknown term for me, as it is non-existing in German, and English is my third language.
Isn't it just a doctor's term in English too? (Honest question.)
But you can exchange the word by any other foreign word. You still get my point, don't you? :)
While JavaScript is not perfect, it is actually a nice little language. It's just that every retard can "program" in it, and then thinks because he wrote a for loop, he is entitled to an opinion about it.
Few people actually know how to program properly in JS. And the only problem is that JS is too forgiving. Just as the rendering engines for (X)HTML and CSS. But that was the original point. And it's not that bad of a point either.
Because simple scripts are way easier than people think. Every person who can play a shooter, puzzle game, or configure some stuff on his computer, can write acceptable scripts. And even total noobs can write bad ones. I think that is a nice thing.
And this is why you can ignore the (non-pro) masses, ranting about JS.
If it were for me, the scripting interface in browsers would have to support multiple high-level languages anyway: Python, Haskell, Java and Ruby would be those that I'd introduce. But others might want Erlang, Ocaml, and maybe even C++. Why not? If the API is clean, the interpreters work as expected, and everything is sandboxed as it should anyway...
And here is the prototype test: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBVmfIUR1DA
Pleasure? In an MS product?
*checks weather predictions for hell*
*looks into the sky for pigs*
Disturbing... indeed...
If only they were ergonomic. (Protip: All MS [or Logitech, or pretty much all others] keyboards without any exception are not ergonomic. They just look as if they were.)
Give me a DataHand Pro II with an integrated 6-axis orb/ball for one hand, and pressure sensitive keys, below $200 for both hands, and you got a ton of clients!
What's bad with eXtreme Sexual Looseness (aka Goatsism)?
This read to me like a mix of "cerveau" (the french word for "brain") and "vagina". And for a moment, I wondered if this is like thinking with the penis? ;)
Why do doctors always have to use foreign words, when we have perfectly good native words? It feels very arrogant, like the Latin bibles, etc.
The worst thing is, that in non-English languages, English world are added too. So you end up with whole sentence that do not contain one native word. And when you look the words up, yo notice that you can construct that entire sentence with native words only, without a loss of any meaning.
To me it really is just an aspect of the "god complex" of the "gods in white". :/
P.S.: I know that the people in TFA are more scientists. But the point is still true.
How is that new? It is that way since Windows XP, and likely even the whole NT and old Windows line before that!
I know because I have this setup with Gentoo and XP on this computer, and I think I can remember it from Windows 98 too.
How could he? There are no comments from him that could be called "stories". ^^
I just won the web economy bullshit bingo! What I will do with the money I won?
Syndicate with talented fixed-cost do-able domestic model uniques, to leverage and scale my verticals, until acquisition for branding, and then reach the turnaround, of course!
(According to their about page)
Which means that the reader holds only 0.0000109375 LoC. ...just so you have a value that you can relate to something.
Sorry, but you apparently never understood what HTML it. Is is a purely semantic language. Maybe you started to use it when it wasn't, and so never made the evolutionary step. Which is ok, if you aren't really building pages.
The <del> tag has no visual representation whatsoever associated with it. Just as any other HTML tag.
If you think about layout for even a second, while writing HTML, your web developer license (if you have one) is automatically revoked. ^^
The browser can decide to display it however it wants. It can even not be displayed at all, but output a series of farts of a monkey listening to sounds created from the HTML and dancing wildly inside a large box of food. If you disagree, use CSS. :)
Your example would make more sense this way:
<del cite="http://some.url/explanation.html" datetime="2009-08-07T03:07:05+0200" hint="content that has been deleted at $datetime from the document, because of $cite">...</del>
But you forget the final connection. Why is it retarded? Because someone makes it to work that way.
It's a great system for those that profit from it.
As I said earlier, it's the problem of revolving door and lobbies, or else the patent office would long be changed.
You really need to update your constitution. (But not the bad way.)
Plan very very wisely, take out the old guillotine, and storm DC. (Warning: If you in that process become what you hate, you fail! And the risk of this happening is extremely high. Hence the planning.)
No. The real problem is, that it was granted in the first place. And the real reason is, that the patent offices works under the control of a government, that has more revolving doors and "lobbys"* than the Internet Explorer has quirks, holes and bugs.
___
* Which suddenly became the word for an euphemistic view on the illegal bribery and disloyalty to the people, which in many countries are major crimes on the punishment level of murder.
They don't need a list. It's everything. And everything not.
Or in simpler words: Think for yourself. Never ever take a pill, without knowing *exactly* how it works, and either studies from people you personally trust, or taking the risk.
Turns out, you *need* nearly no medication at all. Eat really healthy (organic and as little processed as possible, and really tasty at the same time!), exercise, live in a healthy environment (just as much mental as physical), and you are going to be fine, and get old in a nice way. That's really how easy it is!
You only need medication in rare cases, like antibiotics, in life-threatening situations or in case of an injury. Then it's worth the trade-off.
Oh, and of course there are genetic problems, that we still can't fix right in the genetics. So you may have to help yourself out with them too.
There's an RFC for that!
it will stop soon. Big ad companies are already changing their rankings from page impressions to unique users.
You could have said that in four words: "You're a retard".
But I guess you thought yout comment would slip under the douche radar, did you? ^^
(On a more serious note: You are unfortunately right: { $d = People are dumber than $d; eval($d); } ;)
Yes. It is actually called "lock-in" and is a local form of monopoly for everything on the platform, enforced to those who bought their platform.
It's not much better though, because it still is an evil kind of fraud. (It literally is an evil trap!)
P.S.: I got a bag of "evil" words. Want some? ;)
I wonder how many people will actually edit it into Wikipedia! ;)
I agree, but you must realize, that there is so such thing as "unbiased" anything. By basic physical definition. It is completely impossible.
What we call "bias", is what does not fit with our world view, and/or that you don't agree with. ;) (Don't worry, I'm on your side. I think FOX is the craziest group of crazy people ever seen on TV, except maybe for North Korea.)
Of course our world view may make more sense in a physics-based way.
But still, that's how it is.
Maybe this will help you think about it in a more productive way, than to call others "biased", while assuming you are not. :)
If you want to do something good*, do it Socrates-style and lead people into arguing against their own world view, until it becomes unsustainable. Then offer them an advantage in self-confidence when they "upgrade" to the new better world view. Everybody denies attacks to his world view. But nobody denies an upgrade in self-confidence. :)
___ :)
* Unfortunately, "good" is also relative. So "good" is by definition, what's good for you. (Also indirectly trough your community.) But often this is far from good for others, even if you think it is. So either be fair even to their "sick and twisted" reality, because you respect every human. Or go full throttle, and make world better for *you*. Choose the one that gives the biggest evolutionary advantages to the one you want to have them.
But you know nothing about the psychology of this. I'll tell you a story that started just like this:
There was a time, when every German SMS service on the net was free. They only added 20 characters of advertisement.
We (when I say "we", I mean, that I was a developer who was assigned as a backup for that web service) were very "successful" in that business, because our SMS provider, handy.de, got payed in advertisements on our site! (Or in other words: they payed to be able to pay!)
But then, handy.de got into trouble, and so got our competition. So everyone started offering less SMS per day, with less characters, only if you register, and so on.
Which of course did not help at all.
So pay-only services started to pop up. Often with parallel ad-based, but very restricted, services.
handy.de continued to offer those free SMS. And was the first to declare bankruptcy. Then all the other ad-based services died, were canceled, or offered unreasonable things, like 1000 free SMS a day, in *total*.
Soon there were *only* pay-only services. And they survived. Because the users simply had no other choice than to use them. There were no usable free services left.
The morale of the story: When one person starts it, soon all the others will follow. Maybe the first one or two will die. But in the end, everyone will do it, and nobody offering it for free will be left. Because they have to, and also *because they think that now they can*!
So soon, you may not be left with any free choice. And then you will pay. Or nobody will care.
Because frankly, work *really* is not free!
But I agree that Murdoch, with his low-quality stuff will not survive, if he chooses an unacceptable price. Which right now still is everything above free, for services that you can get for free.
But soon it will be a real money value.
I guess they will go with something totally unrealistic, like $1 per article, when they could still make good money, and have actual paying people, when offering an article for something like $0.001, or even less. (Shhh, don't tell Verizon. It will only confuse them. ;)
Strange. I looked up "duplication of core functionality" on Wikipedia, and it redirected me to "monopoly".
And who will then either... ...tell you that it's not his job, to fix your little problems! (Actually happened to a friend of mine!) ...come over, find nothing, and bill you for making a prank call. ...run out of your house with as much stolen stuff as he can carry.
1)
2)
3)
Is making out OK too? ^^
(No men please! ;)