Re:Why not 99 different coins?
on
Making Change
·
· Score: 1
Oh? How would your scheme return 1 coin to me when my change is $1.58?
Re:It is our stupid pricing system
on
Making Change
·
· Score: 1
The "leave a penny" containers always seem full where I shop.
And I presume that money is going to charity? Laugh if you want, but I think that the abolition of pennies would result in a pretty big hit for charities. I know I usually give 99% of my change to charity, and I wouldn't normally give any.
Um, that appears to indeed make it illegal to pay larger sums of money than specified in the specified denominations. Wow, what a dumb law.
Re:Or, even better ...
on
Making Change
·
· Score: 1
Have they seriously done that? What a really, really stupid thing to do. Sounds Australian.
There will always be transactions that don't round nicely to 5 cents, even if all stores are required, by law, to round their prices; for example, try taking 25% off 2.95. Or what if you need to convert from foreign money into your money? 5.00 at the current exchange rate is... 3.82. So do they pay you 3 cents extra, or do you lose 2 cents??
I think the worst thing about that system (and indeed the American system) is that *coins are named*. WHY give coins a name?? It just means a load of meaningless memorization. If you'd given the actual value, in pennies, of those coins, I bet it would have been a lot easier to understand, although still harder than decimalized currency, of course.
Oh, come on. By no stretch of the imagination is it 'hard' to vary a price label when it's being produced by a computer these days. If it's being written by hand, I don't suspect the company is big enough to have that problem.
American coinage is *not* nicely rounded. Here in Britain, £2.50 is easy - £2 coin (or 2 * £1 coin) and a 50p coin. In America, you'd have to actually combine 2 quarters to get 50. OK, it's still relatively easy but I suspect it causes problems for those bad at math(s).
I've always thought the Americann system of coins was far inferior to the British system. For one thing, you have to give a name to every damn coin that you produce, making it hard to know how much one coin is worth if you're a foreigner (I still don't know, is a nickel 5 cents? 10 cents???) In the UK we call our coins 1p, 2p, 5p, 10p, 20p and 50p. Nice and easy.
For second, you've got the idiotic 'quarter'. 25 cents is NOT a sensible sum of money to be carrying around, as it is not rounded to 10. Any coin worth more than 1/10th of a dollar should be rounded to the nearest 10.
But, can't we 'build for slower hardware' the modern WMs, in order to get them running just as fast, whilst maintaining the functionality? I think we should be able to. It's mostly laziness that results in GUIs responding slowly, considering the incredible raw power we have in computers today. If you told someone 10 years ago that, given a 2ghz machine with half a GIG of RAM, we'd have trouble getting interfaces to run quickly today, they'd laugh.
I can't say I've had the same experience. Maybe it's because I was brought up with the successive Windows operating systems for a long time, but the first thing I did with multiple desktops in X was get rid of them. They just confuse me. I mean you click another desktop, and... get a completely different set of apps. It's disjointed, and does nothing to make me more productive. Then again, I don't usually go around with 50 windows open.
I think there are 2 issues here. One is the percentage of the work that is being 'copied'. In the case of a poem, if you 'republish' the poem, the entire work is being 'copied'. In the case of a song, the lyrics could be described as maybe 10%, if that, of the work. The idea of demanding money to publish lyrics is utterly ludicrous.
The second issue is that of how widespread the distribution is. I'm sure there are thousands of websites right now that are 'illegally' 'publishing' poems. I put publishing in quotes because I don't really consider such small-scale reproduction to be publishing, and any attempt to gain money from this so-called 'publishing' is pure greediness. The idea of demanding money from such small-scale sites is also utterly ludicrous.
I hope these people are exposed for the greedy bastards they are.
The entire idea of IRC is communications between individuals. Some is direct, some is centralised, that part doesn't matter. It's a P2P network, and one of the significant ways files get traded.
You obviously don't have a clue what a P2P network is. The most striking feature of a Peer to Peer network is its lack of a centralised server - you communicate with the network through a peer. IRC has centralised servers, and although it is possible to form a direct connection with another client, you cannot connect to the network _through_ them. IRC is *not* P2P.
Sorry to be offtopic, but how come your post is appearing below the post above, when yours is rated 4, the one above 2, and my setting is to list highest scores first??
Reminds me of that Simpsons episode where Marge makes Itchy & Scratchy more PC, and all the kids stop watching it:-)
-- ``Itchy and Scratchy and Marge''
Meyers: [explaining on the phone]
Itchy just stole Scratchy's ice cream cone, and...
Animator: Oh, make it a pie. Pies are easier to draw.
Meyers: [to animator] Okay, a pie!
[to Marge] Anyway, Scratchy is understandably upset.
Marge: Uh huh.
Meyers: So we figured he could just, you know, grab Itchy and toss him into
a bucket of acid.
Marge: Couldn't Itchy share his pie with Scratchy?
Then they would have pie!
Meyers: [walks to storyboard, considers, steps back]
It's different, I'll give you that...
Mmm... I think you're forgetting 2 things. First, the human brain is fantastically good at interpretation. It will take such an enormous amount of mangling to make the message unreadable that you'd have to filter out virtually everything. You don't want to filter out legit e-mails.
Second, and more importantly, the majority of people do not wage a 24 hour war against spam and run a Bayesian spam filter. They just put up with it.
I think the solution may be technical (tarpit relays?) but not the technical solution you're proposing. If it was purely Bayesian filter vs spammer, spammer would win hands down.
He thinks that people who hate spam are just sad bastards with nothing better to do.
"I know this all sounds like you're hiding yourself and doing this illegitimately, but the reason you have to do it is everybody tries to shut you down," Shiels said.
Doesn't that TELL him something?!
There's people who sit in their basements and have nothing better to do than get all upset about spam," Shiels said.
So yeah, reading the article, I came to the conclusion that this guy probably is a total moron.
Actually, if a given outcome's probability of occuring in not zero, I *guarantee 100%* it will happen, given an infinite time period to happen. Learn basic statistics if you disagree with this. And as we're assuming that the universe is random, and not a number set excluding certain possible outcomes, I *guarantee 100%* that, given infinate space, not only a planet similar to Earth will exist, but a planet *absolutely identical in every way* to Earth will exist.
I take your point, but it is rather assuming that the user is not going to want to use the command line, for the second they do, they have to start using a load of English directory names that they never use in the GUI.
That seems like a rather stupid approach to me. Why not *actually* localize the directories on international versions of your software, and create symbolic links of the original English directories that point to the localized directories?
Not a great idea though, and only marginally better than the current TV licence. I reckon the BBC should be entirely funded by subscription and advertising. I simply don't see a place for a public sector broadcaster in this day and age. Perhaps a small amount of funding from taxation would be acceptable, but *not* a large amount, as that would still be funding an unnecessary institution with taxpayers' money, and would only make the BBC accountable to the government (even WORSE than the current system!)
and if users want their own without installing system-wide, they install them in ~/.mozilla/default/*.slt/plugins... EXACTLY where macOS and windows users save them as well!!
Erm, not quite. Let's take a look at where my Plugins directory is:
Slashdot Mirror
Oh? How would your scheme return 1 coin to me when my change is $1.58?
The "leave a penny" containers always seem full where I shop.
And I presume that money is going to charity? Laugh if you want, but I think that the abolition of pennies would result in a pretty big hit for charities. I know I usually give 99% of my change to charity, and I wouldn't normally give any.
Um, that appears to indeed make it illegal to pay larger sums of money than specified in the specified denominations. Wow, what a dumb law.
Have they seriously done that? What a really, really stupid thing to do. Sounds Australian.
... 3.82. So do they pay you 3 cents extra, or do you lose 2 cents??
There will always be transactions that don't round nicely to 5 cents, even if all stores are required, by law, to round their prices; for example, try taking 25% off 2.95. Or what if you need to convert from foreign money into your money? 5.00 at the current exchange rate is
I think the worst thing about that system (and indeed the American system) is that *coins are named*. WHY give coins a name?? It just means a load of meaningless memorization. If you'd given the actual value, in pennies, of those coins, I bet it would have been a lot easier to understand, although still harder than decimalized currency, of course.
Oh, come on. By no stretch of the imagination is it 'hard' to vary a price label when it's being produced by a computer these days. If it's being written by hand, I don't suspect the company is big enough to have that problem.
American coinage is *not* nicely rounded. Here in Britain, £2.50 is easy - £2 coin (or 2 * £1 coin) and a 50p coin. In America, you'd have to actually combine 2 quarters to get 50. OK, it's still relatively easy but I suspect it causes problems for those bad at math(s).
I've always thought the Americann system of coins was far inferior to the British system. For one thing, you have to give a name to every damn coin that you produce, making it hard to know how much one coin is worth if you're a foreigner (I still don't know, is a nickel 5 cents? 10 cents???) In the UK we call our coins 1p, 2p, 5p, 10p, 20p and 50p. Nice and easy.
For second, you've got the idiotic 'quarter'. 25 cents is NOT a sensible sum of money to be carrying around, as it is not rounded to 10. Any coin worth more than 1/10th of a dollar should be rounded to the nearest 10.
Also, you don't have a 1/2 dollar coin. Why not?
Yeah, but that double would cast quite properly to a float.
Why not move on to "Stage Two" where we talk it over with the victim first, let him get some more bandwidth, and THEN post the story on Slashdot!
Because that would result in most Slashdot stories being posted several days (at least) AFTER the news broke.
But, can't we 'build for slower hardware' the modern WMs, in order to get them running just as fast, whilst maintaining the functionality? I think we should be able to. It's mostly laziness that results in GUIs responding slowly, considering the incredible raw power we have in computers today. If you told someone 10 years ago that, given a 2ghz machine with half a GIG of RAM, we'd have trouble getting interfaces to run quickly today, they'd laugh.
I can't say I've had the same experience. Maybe it's because I was brought up with the successive Windows operating systems for a long time, but the first thing I did with multiple desktops in X was get rid of them. They just confuse me. I mean you click another desktop, and... get a completely different set of apps. It's disjointed, and does nothing to make me more productive. Then again, I don't usually go around with 50 windows open.
MOV AX, 5
Auditor: Hey! You can't use that. It was invented by.. (checks big black book)... uh...
I think there are 2 issues here. One is the percentage of the work that is being 'copied'. In the case of a poem, if you 'republish' the poem, the entire work is being 'copied'. In the case of a song, the lyrics could be described as maybe 10%, if that, of the work. The idea of demanding money to publish lyrics is utterly ludicrous.
The second issue is that of how widespread the distribution is. I'm sure there are thousands of websites right now that are 'illegally' 'publishing' poems. I put publishing in quotes because I don't really consider such small-scale reproduction to be publishing, and any attempt to gain money from this so-called 'publishing' is pure greediness. The idea of demanding money from such small-scale sites is also utterly ludicrous.
I hope these people are exposed for the greedy bastards they are.
The entire idea of IRC is communications between individuals. Some is direct, some is centralised, that part doesn't matter. It's a P2P network, and one of the significant ways files get traded.
You obviously don't have a clue what a P2P network is. The most striking feature of a Peer to Peer network is its lack of a centralised server - you communicate with the network through a peer. IRC has centralised servers, and although it is possible to form a direct connection with another client, you cannot connect to the network _through_ them. IRC is *not* P2P.
Sorry to be offtopic, but how come your post is appearing below the post above, when yours is rated 4, the one above 2, and my setting is to list highest scores first??
Reminds me of that Simpsons episode where Marge makes Itchy & Scratchy more PC, and all the kids stop watching it :-)
-- ``Itchy and Scratchy and Marge''
Meyers: [explaining on the phone]
Itchy just stole Scratchy's ice cream cone, and...
Animator: Oh, make it a pie. Pies are easier to draw.
Meyers: [to animator] Okay, a pie!
[to Marge] Anyway, Scratchy is understandably upset.
Marge: Uh huh.
Meyers: So we figured he could just, you know, grab Itchy and toss him into
a bucket of acid.
Marge: Couldn't Itchy share his pie with Scratchy?
Then they would have pie!
Meyers: [walks to storyboard, considers, steps back]
It's different, I'll give you that...
Mmm... I think you're forgetting 2 things. First, the human brain is fantastically good at interpretation. It will take such an enormous amount of mangling to make the message unreadable that you'd have to filter out virtually everything. You don't want to filter out legit e-mails.
Second, and more importantly, the majority of people do not wage a 24 hour war against spam and run a Bayesian spam filter. They just put up with it.
I think the solution may be technical (tarpit relays?) but not the technical solution you're proposing. If it was purely Bayesian filter vs spammer, spammer would win hands down.
He thinks that people who hate spam are just sad bastards with nothing better to do.
"I know this all sounds like you're hiding yourself and doing this illegitimately, but the reason you have to do it is everybody tries to shut you down," Shiels said.
Doesn't that TELL him something?!
There's people who sit in their basements and have nothing better to do than get all upset about spam," Shiels said.
So yeah, reading the article, I came to the conclusion that this guy probably is a total moron.
Actually, if a given outcome's probability of occuring in not zero, I *guarantee 100%* it will happen, given an infinite time period to happen. Learn basic statistics if you disagree with this. And as we're assuming that the universe is random, and not a number set excluding certain possible outcomes, I *guarantee 100%* that, given infinate space, not only a planet similar to Earth will exist, but a planet *absolutely identical in every way* to Earth will exist.
No, because the monkeys would probably die of old age before the works of Shakespeare were written :-)
I take your point, but it is rather assuming that the user is not going to want to use the command line, for the second they do, they have to start using a load of English directory names that they never use in the GUI.
That seems like a rather stupid approach to me. Why not *actually* localize the directories on international versions of your software, and create symbolic links of the original English directories that point to the localized directories?
Not a great idea though, and only marginally better than the current TV licence. I reckon the BBC should be entirely funded by subscription and advertising. I simply don't see a place for a public sector broadcaster in this day and age. Perhaps a small amount of funding from taxation would be acceptable, but *not* a large amount, as that would still be funding an unnecessary institution with taxpayers' money, and would only make the BBC accountable to the government (even WORSE than the current system!)
and if users want their own without installing system-wide, they install them in ~/.mozilla/default/*.slt/plugins... EXACTLY where macOS and windows users save them as well!!
Erm, not quite. Let's take a look at where my Plugins directory is:
C:\Program Files\mozilla.org\Mozilla\Plugins\
compared to
~/.mozilla/default/*.slt/plugins
hrm.