Seriouly, has anybody ever made a Doom WAD or Quake modification with Microsoft characters as as enemies?
Once I sent a proposal for replacement of the old GUI desk metaphore to an Italian researcher on the subject (she was really cool and I wanted to make a good impression with my humor. Waste of time; the problem seems to have been the rest of my personality.)
My theory about human behaviour is that everything we do can be classified under (at least) one of the seven sins, so a good GUI for the file system could be based on Dante's Hell.
Depending on sin (restaurant list? Gluttony), you find the general level. Then there is a big map with suffering people. It should be easy to get further mnemonic aid by using images of people you know, etc.
The main problem would be old girlfriends. Since the punishment for lust was flying around and being crushed against cliffs now and then, they wouldn't stay put. That would be harder to find, in other words.
Bill Gates et al would have prominent places at the bottom -- where traitors and criminal monopolists were put by Alighieri.
I was just trying to be a bit shocking with my food habits.:-)
Here in Sweden it's a bit taboo to eat horse, but they sell it for sandwiches under another name. (I'm not certain if the sensitivity comes from the "ol' work buddy" attitude to horses, or if it was opression of the old Asa-religion, where eating horse meat was a ritual or something.)
You mean like you can't go under the knife for an operation without biting a bullet to handle the pain? Everyone knows that is the way it always has been and always will be.
Don't laugh -- it took decades longer than necessary for pain relief to be accepted because of conservatism. It was obviously against nature, too.
All large changes, including democracy, have been criticised by idiots that think it's against nature and their religions.
But I shouldn't judge hastily -- can you give some serious motivation that's just not a claim death is "natural"? That argument is a bit... old.
Actually, considering that Perl actually has syntax, and that Perl 6 macros can go anywhere that Perl 6 subs can (e.g. creating new operators), you could argue that Perl 6 macros are more powerful than Lisp ones...
As a self confessed Perl fanatic it hurts, but I still have to disagree in the name of my integrity.:-)
The feature with Lisp is that there are only simple parse trees -- so it's easy to analyze and modify code as a data structure.
I do not believe it's possible for code to analyze code as easily in Perl as in Lisp -- because of the semantic and syntactical richness.
That richness of expressiveness is what makes (at least me) love Perl because it's fun, but when analyzing and modifying code, it must be a disadvantage. Different optimizations.
The low weight of the cable means most should burn up in the atmosphere if it breaks.
From the faq: "The majority, the long end out in space, gains enough speed that it burns up in the atmosphere, with the lower portion falling into the sea. It will not fall on top of anyone."
I saw that you made further claims to an Anon Poster that a break would have "catastrophic consequences".
Are there any news I'm not aware of? Otherwise, it do seem like you haven't read even the faq about what you're totally sure about.
They know that Americans will (justifiably) hesitate before attacking an area with civilians, and so they're taking advantage of it.
It do take some incredible bastards to use their own civilians as shields -- and hope the other side are humane.
And (as noted in a parallel post to the grand parent of this post) according to the Geneva convention if a civilian area is used for military purposes, that place isn't considered civilian anymore.
But it doesn't work that way for western armies (when the press watch, which they always do).
non-conventional means of energy shall soon be required since there aren't that many natural resources available anymore.
I guess you learned that in the simplistic popular press, but
history teaches another lesson.
(The oil based economy's best days might be gone, though. Changing to something else is a good thing, anyway -- if the transition is carefully handled...)
Whi is writing the history? the winner or the who loose?
In almost all searches for truth, you will not reach it. But you can get more or less close.
Yes, you can't reach perfect models of reality in multitudes of area (history, physics, etc), but to claim that they are all bunk is a bit overblown.
It's like saying that since we can't freeze anything to 0 degrees Kelvin, that all termometers are worthless. Physicists can get very, very close to absolute zero -- and measure how far we are.
(On topic, I loved Tanenbaum's books when I studied comp sci and would have lots of them, if people returned all things I've lent them the last 20 years...:-) )
(Not about Emacs, of course... vi isn't pure crap -- just not as good!)
If anyone dares to post an honest critique with suggestions on how to improve the shot/story then they are immediately bombarded with flames and the forum is filled with calls to the moderators to eject and ban them.
It needs trust and time to accept criticism.
I know people in a writer's circle. They have to do honest criticism -- and also learn who among them will give good review. It is not easy -- try going for a smaller and/or more isolated forums and get to know people.
As Strindberg wrote (my bad translation), "in the book shop, the small book hanging -- it's a bleeding heart dangling there on it's hook".
I'm inclined to believe, often instantly and completely, a slashdot posting endorsing product X, because the poster seems unaffiliated and genuine and doesn't really have anything to gain from endorsing it.
Personally, I tend to be shocked whenever someone on/. posts without hating incompetent products. Why say something when you only have positive things to say? You look like a stupid fan-boy!
To take an obvious example, why write about how wonderful Emacs is when you can write about how 'vi' is utter garbage? Both are truths, of course, but one looks a bit naive.
So I would be a bit more suspicious than you... any gushing reviews like that are obviously written by idiots if they weren't outright astroturf!
Oh, the subject was President Bush's lack of intellectual "sell" -- and you brought up Clinton's brother. I'm sorry, I didn't know Bubba had been a prez, too...:-)
Slashdot Mirror
My theory about human behaviour is that everything we do can be classified under (at least) one of the seven sins, so a good GUI for the file system could be based on Dante's Hell.
Depending on sin (restaurant list? Gluttony), you find the general level. Then there is a big map with suffering people. It should be easy to get further mnemonic aid by using images of people you know, etc.
The main problem would be old girlfriends. Since the punishment for lust was flying around and being crushed against cliffs now and then, they wouldn't stay put. That would be harder to find, in other words.
Bill Gates et al would have prominent places at the bottom -- where traitors and criminal monopolists were put by Alighieri.
Personally, I think all protein is good -- as long as it's not from mad cows.
I was just trying to be a bit shocking with my food habits. :-)
Here in Sweden it's a bit taboo to eat horse, but they sell it for sandwiches under another name. (I'm not certain if the sensitivity comes from the "ol' work buddy" attitude to horses, or if it was opression of the old Asa-religion, where eating horse meat was a ritual or something.)
Don't laugh -- it took decades longer than necessary for pain relief to be accepted because of conservatism. It was obviously against nature, too.
All large changes, including democracy, have been criticised by idiots that think it's against nature and their religions.
But I shouldn't judge hastily -- can you give some serious motivation that's just not a claim death is "natural"? That argument is a bit ... old.
foobie_bletch() if test_file("foobar", "+r");
Seems more orthogonal.
But less compatible with shell programming, of course... hmm. I'm not certain, on closer consideration.
If you have put all the time into it already, a few hours more wouldn't hurt that much... pretty please?
(-: Then it wouldn't be as good an example for the Perl-hating crowd, either. :-)
The feature with Lisp is that there are only simple parse trees -- so it's easy to analyze and modify code as a data structure.
I do not believe it's possible for code to analyze code as easily in Perl as in Lisp -- because of the semantic and syntactical richness.
That richness of expressiveness is what makes (at least me) love Perl because it's fun, but when analyzing and modifying code, it must be a disadvantage. Different optimizations.
Please, do convince me I'm wrong! :-)
Just one nitpick:
That is, as far as I know, true for all but lisp macros. (Perl 6 changes that situation?)Lisp is the only language I'd rather use than Perl -- for most tasks.
But most stuff are quite logical and easy to pick up for a Perl 5 programmer like ... (yada yada yada), etc.
boolean operators,
Lots are straight Perl 5, like .. list ..), { }-use, []-use, \, etc.
eq, ne, (
quite a few are pure C (and Perl 5), like
--, ++, +=, ==, !=, &&, ||, |=, [array access], etc.
In short, it's not that different from Perl 5. An indication on the periodic table for what is different from Perl 5 would have been very useful.
Author, please?
(Besides, the first time wasn't a mistake.)
At least for us booring nerds that are mainly interested in hiding how booring we are? :-)
(This was really cool, btw.)
The low weight of the cable means most should burn up in the atmosphere if it breaks.
From the faq: "The majority, the long end out in space, gains enough speed that it burns up in the atmosphere, with the lower portion falling into the sea. It will not fall on top of anyone."
I saw that you made further claims to an Anon Poster that a break would have "catastrophic consequences".
Are there any news I'm not aware of? Otherwise, it do seem like you haven't read even the faq about what you're totally sure about.
And (as noted in a parallel post to the grand parent of this post) according to the Geneva convention if a civilian area is used for military purposes, that place isn't considered civilian anymore.
But it doesn't work that way for western armies (when the press watch, which they always do).
(The oil based economy's best days might be gone, though. Changing to something else is a good thing, anyway -- if the transition is carefully handled...)
Mod parent up, contains information!!
Yes, you can't reach perfect models of reality in multitudes of area (history, physics, etc), but to claim that they are all bunk is a bit overblown.
It's like saying that since we can't freeze anything to 0 degrees Kelvin, that all termometers are worthless. Physicists can get very, very close to absolute zero -- and measure how far we are.
(On topic, I loved Tanenbaum's books when I studied comp sci and would have lots of them, if people returned all things I've lent them the last 20 years... :-) )
(Not about Emacs, of course... vi isn't pure crap -- just not as good!)
It needs trust and time to accept criticism.I know people in a writer's circle. They have to do honest criticism -- and also learn who among them will give good review. It is not easy -- try going for a smaller and/or more isolated forums and get to know people.
As Strindberg wrote (my bad translation), "in the book shop, the small book hanging -- it's a bleeding heart dangling there on it's hook".
No posts at all on Wednesday, neither to me or the others wondering...
It seems we won't get answers.
To take an obvious example, why write about how wonderful Emacs is when you can write about how 'vi' is utter garbage? Both are truths, of course, but one looks a bit naive.
So I would be a bit more suspicious than you... any gushing reviews like that are obviously written by idiots if they weren't outright astroturf!
For safety's sake:
:-)
It's about as serious to judge people by their relatives as it is to judge them by their skin colour.
(-: The first one to agree with that sentiment would be my own brother, btw. :-)