Brilliant! Now every gardener and farmer can get a SWAT raid every time they throw fertilizer on their plants. Every swimming pool owner can get a SWAT raid every time they throw chlorine in their pool. Every high school chemistry teacher can get a SWAT raid.. you get the picture.
Alerting drug users isn't brilliant either, it's immoral to throw someone in jail for having a few ounces of weed or whatever.
That's one of the stupidest things I've ever read. Read your own comment again, slowly, go sit and think about it for a while, and when it comes to you, I promise you'll kick yourself.
I propose the following. Create a litigation finance pool that is covered through corporate taxes... When they are involved in litigation, it gets covered by this pool
Wow, a million lawyers just sprung erections and drooled all over themselves.
This really won't work well, as it creates an immediate moral hazard... lawyers will conintually be trying to dip in and keep themselves busy earning a living off someone else's dime. The costs of the administration of such a fund would be huge and the true costs of litigation would be rendered opaque due to the complexity, actual costs will no longer even be clear.
I'm not sure what to offer as an alternative solution but I think we could come up with better/smarter solutions if we tried.
I should actually hope so, this isn't even something to be apologetic about. If my girlfriend is dragged into an alley by a couple of guys intending to rape her and kill her, then I F'ing well hope and pray that her gun kills her attackers precisely as intended.
There are actually good reasons that many cops prefer Glocks that lack even a conventional safety switch... when there is a risk you may be exposed to unexpected dangers, you need to be ready to respond instantly... putting any extra barriers in your way, like forced safety switches or this electronic grip matching stuff, just slows you down and increases your odds of going home in a body bag that day.
I think one of the consequences of having all risks removed from your environment for your entire childhood and most your adult life, is that you become more complacent, it becomes harder to hold that mental mode of "this is dangerous, this is dangerous" because we're so used to constant safety.
Accidental deaths occur in the US because people are morons
Even so, accidental deaths are relatively rare even in the US.. 100 to 150 per year or so. In contrast e.g. over 1000 kids from drowning each year, around 7000 per year from car accidents, and about 1000 per year from poisoning.
So let me guess, the critical measures that Obama promised to make by January will (a) focus on keeping record of who is mentally unstable, or (b) be "measures" that would actually do nothing to stop further school shootings? I'll bet money it's the latter.
The politicians do not want to actually solve the problem of school shootings, because every time there is one, it creates a climate of fear where people will accept more restrictions on the freedoms of law-abiding people. If they ever actually sold the problem and reduced school shootings, they'd lose their free pass.
I'd rather accidentally shoot my daughter with a taser when she sneaks in after curfew and watch her crap her pants than shoot her with a pistol and watch her bleed out.
And I'd rather my daughter have the means to at least have a chance of defending herself if she's someday dragged into an alley by gang rapists / murderers.
Self-defense is a basic human right.
I have a feeling the original poster is having "nits picked" on more than just cosmetic issues, and that he only mentioned 'whitespace' as the most extreme example to try paint it as if it is only cosmetic issues.
Coding standards decide whether you should do "goto SomeLabel" or "goto someLabel"; they don't prohibit crap code.
Sure, but in my experience the two tend to go together. It's like, the type of person who holds themselves to good standards in areas of variable naming, is also the type of person who tends to hold themselves to good standards in areas like software design vs spaghetti. The type of developer who is too arrogant and lazy to follow a convention is usually too arrogant and lazy to write decent code. It's about a mindset of professionalism, a clear head, and about taking pride in your work. Some people are professionals who take pride in their work, and this usually reflects in multiple ways.
Also, the arrogant laziness displayed by the summary poster, he doesn't feel the pain of his own laziness because it is 9 times out of 10 other people who have to clean up after him and figure out what he did. Egotistical gusto about being above it all, is usually the same egotistical gusto that creates a blind spot that doesn't notice that others are cleaning up a mess. The poster talks about "every shop he's worked in", so he's jumping jobs and doesn't see the next guys trying to read his code and scratching their heads, I'll bet money on it.
Of course, conventions should be functional. I don't give a crap if you do "for (int i=0" or ("for ( int i = 0" for example. But there are some conventions that are simple to follow, and make a huge difference in reading code. For example, "m_" prefix means "member", "g_" means global, and no prefix means a local (stack) variable... that saves large amounts of time not having to cross-check what is what, you can immediately see from just looking. Trust me, when you have more than just a tiny codebase and start dealing in "real" amounts of code, i.e. hundreds of thousands or millions of lines), then it helps.
And they go together when cleaning up also. Spaghetti code is a big problem, but if you're cleaning up, then having some useful conventions makes cleaning up spaghetti easier.
True story, I was once given a stern lecture on the dangers of MSG's by a colleague while he sat smoking a cigarette. No trace of irony in his voice.
That said, MSG's probably really aren't very good for you.
Considering that things like "curfew" and "loitering" ("the act of remaining in a particular public place for a protracted time") are amongst the most commonly prosecuted felonies in the US, just to start with, I don't think it sounds too hyperbolic (e.g. http://felonyguide.com/List-of-felony-crimes.php). Linger for a few seconds too long on the sidewalk while out to lunch? Sorry, guilty of loitering.
The problem is just look who they're asking for a pardon.. the government, who are little more than a bunch of criminally-minded sociopaths who don't care about doing the right thing. It is a strange concept to even ask such people for a "pardon", as if their "blessing" carries any moral weight - Alan Turing arguably contributed far more to society than any of these people (like Lord McNally).
The silver lining here is that I suspect in 500 years, 1000 years, people will still remember Alan Turing positively as an important figure in the development of computing, while if anyone remembers "Lord McNally" (doubtful) it will be as the asshole prick who denied Alan Turing a "pardon".
Enlightenment was way ahead of almost anything else for quite a long time... back in the 90's it was exceptional... many of the desktops based on it were beautiful, works of art, better than most desktops of today from any OS. That was a time when Apple was something everyone called "dead" and the best from MS was that kludgy Win95 thing... Enlightenment seemed to me like something that should have made a much bigger impact than it did, I'm not sure if it's because it seemed to permanently stay in alpha or something.
Yup, I've seen many small businesses/contractors get starry-eyed like girls at a Justin Bieber concert* when Very-Big-Corp wants to work with them, and almost without fail they get steamrolled and screwed over in some way. 'Been there done that' myself, too, but I saw through the bullshit just in time to not sign on the dotted line. You think you need their business to enter the 'big time' and you imagine you're making 'sacrifices' in order to get to some 'next level' but reality is you're gonna get used up and tossed out, and they know it.
* The tell-tale line here is "We couldn't be happier to work for such a big player in the market" - submitter is making business decisions based on emotion. Very-Big-Corp will sink your business, if you care about your business, either get very strict with them or cut them out.
So Facebook went to great expense to have this massive vote for changing their system for no reason because things actually stay the same? Something about that doesn't add up, let me think.
Slashdot Mirror
Brilliant! Now every gardener and farmer can get a SWAT raid every time they throw fertilizer on their plants. Every swimming pool owner can get a SWAT raid every time they throw chlorine in their pool. Every high school chemistry teacher can get a SWAT raid .. you get the picture.
Alerting drug users isn't brilliant either, it's immoral to throw someone in jail for having a few ounces of weed or whatever.
That's one of the stupidest things I've ever read. Read your own comment again, slowly, go sit and think about it for a while, and when it comes to you, I promise you'll kick yourself.
I propose the following. Create a litigation finance pool that is covered through corporate taxes ... When they are involved in litigation, it gets covered by this pool
Wow, a million lawyers just sprung erections and drooled all over themselves.
This really won't work well, as it creates an immediate moral hazard ... lawyers will conintually be trying to dip in and keep themselves busy earning a living off someone else's dime. The costs of the administration of such a fund would be huge and the true costs of litigation would be rendered opaque due to the complexity, actual costs will no longer even be clear.
I'm not sure what to offer as an alternative solution but I think we could come up with better/smarter solutions if we tried.
Guns are designed to kill
I should actually hope so, this isn't even something to be apologetic about. If my girlfriend is dragged into an alley by a couple of guys intending to rape her and kill her, then I F'ing well hope and pray that her gun kills her attackers precisely as intended.
Uh, I think you missed a chunk of that analogy there.
There are actually good reasons that many cops prefer Glocks that lack even a conventional safety switch ... when there is a risk you may be exposed to unexpected dangers, you need to be ready to respond instantly ... putting any extra barriers in your way, like forced safety switches or this electronic grip matching stuff, just slows you down and increases your odds of going home in a body bag that day.
If you're lucky enough to even be near the safe, and not e.g. situated with the robbers somewhere between where you happen to be, and the safe.
I think one of the consequences of having all risks removed from your environment for your entire childhood and most your adult life, is that you become more complacent, it becomes harder to hold that mental mode of "this is dangerous, this is dangerous" because we're so used to constant safety.
I hear Elon Musk wants to help solve this problem by sending 80,000 lawyers a year to Mars.
Accidental deaths occur in the US because people are morons
Even so, accidental deaths are relatively rare even in the US .. 100 to 150 per year or so. In contrast e.g. over 1000 kids from drowning each year, around 7000 per year from car accidents, and about 1000 per year from poisoning.
http://www.childdeathreview.org/nationalchildmortalitydata.htm
So let me guess, the critical measures that Obama promised to make by January will (a) focus on keeping record of who is mentally unstable, or (b) be "measures" that would actually do nothing to stop further school shootings? I'll bet money it's the latter.
The politicians do not want to actually solve the problem of school shootings, because every time there is one, it creates a climate of fear where people will accept more restrictions on the freedoms of law-abiding people. If they ever actually sold the problem and reduced school shootings, they'd lose their free pass.
9 out of 10 criminals prefer their victims be unarmed. Oh sorry, that would be 10 out of 10.
I'd rather accidentally shoot my daughter with a taser when she sneaks in after curfew and watch her crap her pants than shoot her with a pistol and watch her bleed out.
And I'd rather my daughter have the means to at least have a chance of defending herself if she's someday dragged into an alley by gang rapists / murderers. Self-defense is a basic human right.
I have a feeling the original poster is having "nits picked" on more than just cosmetic issues, and that he only mentioned 'whitespace' as the most extreme example to try paint it as if it is only cosmetic issues.
Coding standards decide whether you should do "goto SomeLabel" or "goto someLabel"; they don't prohibit crap code.
Sure, but in my experience the two tend to go together. It's like, the type of person who holds themselves to good standards in areas of variable naming, is also the type of person who tends to hold themselves to good standards in areas like software design vs spaghetti. The type of developer who is too arrogant and lazy to follow a convention is usually too arrogant and lazy to write decent code. It's about a mindset of professionalism, a clear head, and about taking pride in your work. Some people are professionals who take pride in their work, and this usually reflects in multiple ways.
Also, the arrogant laziness displayed by the summary poster, he doesn't feel the pain of his own laziness because it is 9 times out of 10 other people who have to clean up after him and figure out what he did. Egotistical gusto about being above it all, is usually the same egotistical gusto that creates a blind spot that doesn't notice that others are cleaning up a mess. The poster talks about "every shop he's worked in", so he's jumping jobs and doesn't see the next guys trying to read his code and scratching their heads, I'll bet money on it.
Of course, conventions should be functional. I don't give a crap if you do "for (int i=0" or ("for ( int i = 0" for example. But there are some conventions that are simple to follow, and make a huge difference in reading code. For example, "m_" prefix means "member", "g_" means global, and no prefix means a local (stack) variable ... that saves large amounts of time not having to cross-check what is what, you can immediately see from just looking. Trust me, when you have more than just a tiny codebase and start dealing in "real" amounts of code, i.e. hundreds of thousands or millions of lines), then it helps.
And they go together when cleaning up also. Spaghetti code is a big problem, but if you're cleaning up, then having some useful conventions makes cleaning up spaghetti easier.
True story, I was once given a stern lecture on the dangers of MSG's by a colleague while he sat smoking a cigarette. No trace of irony in his voice. That said, MSG's probably really aren't very good for you.
Neither does "ugly". It's a bit silly to presume aesthetics and functionality are mutually exclusive.
What makes biomass some ultimate measure of value?
And yet now the future has actually arrived, what we have is the Win8 Metro UI. How's that for irony. You must surely be joking.
Your post might have carried some weight had it not gone off the rails with this ridiculously absurd claim.
Considering that things like "curfew" and "loitering" ("the act of remaining in a particular public place for a protracted time") are amongst the most commonly prosecuted felonies in the US, just to start with, I don't think it sounds too hyperbolic (e.g. http://felonyguide.com/List-of-felony-crimes.php). Linger for a few seconds too long on the sidewalk while out to lunch? Sorry, guilty of loitering.
The problem is just look who they're asking for a pardon .. the government, who are little more than a bunch of criminally-minded sociopaths who don't care about doing the right thing. It is a strange concept to even ask such people for a "pardon", as if their "blessing" carries any moral weight - Alan Turing arguably contributed far more to society than any of these people (like Lord McNally).
The silver lining here is that I suspect in 500 years, 1000 years, people will still remember Alan Turing positively as an important figure in the development of computing, while if anyone remembers "Lord McNally" (doubtful) it will be as the asshole prick who denied Alan Turing a "pardon".
Enlightenment was way ahead of almost anything else for quite a long time ... back in the 90's it was exceptional ... many of the desktops based on it were beautiful, works of art, better than most desktops of today from any OS. That was a time when Apple was something everyone called "dead" and the best from MS was that kludgy Win95 thing ... Enlightenment seemed to me like something that should have made a much bigger impact than it did, I'm not sure if it's because it seemed to permanently stay in alpha or something.
Yup, I've seen many small businesses/contractors get starry-eyed like girls at a Justin Bieber concert* when Very-Big-Corp wants to work with them, and almost without fail they get steamrolled and screwed over in some way. 'Been there done that' myself, too, but I saw through the bullshit just in time to not sign on the dotted line. You think you need their business to enter the 'big time' and you imagine you're making 'sacrifices' in order to get to some 'next level' but reality is you're gonna get used up and tossed out, and they know it.
* The tell-tale line here is "We couldn't be happier to work for such a big player in the market" - submitter is making business decisions based on emotion. Very-Big-Corp will sink your business, if you care about your business, either get very strict with them or cut them out.
So Facebook went to great expense to have this massive vote for changing their system for no reason because things actually stay the same? Something about that doesn't add up, let me think.