Which sucks, because if you have a Mac Laptop you almost never shut it down or reboot. I use this feature ONLY when I know I'm going to have to be on battery for an extended period of time. It'd be nice to ONLY turn on the discrete graphics when I need them (which isn't all that often) but I don't want to log out every time I just want to fire up a game or something.
Which would be a cool feature if it didn't require logging out every time the switch was made. As a result, I almost never use the feature since I almost never shut my Mac down.
Yeah, it does. Two extremist (and really, they don't even have to be extremist) factions who hate each other can be completely wrong. Rarely is there a situation in a world as subjective as politics where a question only has two possible answers.
The problem with most political "solutions" is that they treat symptoms directly instead of asking questions like, "How did we come to this?" Whether or not to socialize medicine is one such arena.
"Thanks to TV and for the convenience of TV, you can only be one of two kinds of human beings, either a liberal or a conservative." -- Kurt Vonnegut
I might check that out. Someone further down this thread mentioned Arch, and while they're not Debian based (I just like apt) they seem to be just what the doctor ordered. However, I'll give this distro a look too.
And grow your own if you have the time and space (which really, doesn't take as much as most people think). Do your own composting and life's even better.
"Organic" foods are just another way to overcharge the for the "green" fad (and for the most part, that's what it is, a fad) and the privilege of feeling good.
Although, I gotta say, it does start to get old and feel old that EVERYTHING is a fucking scam.
Because the slashdot crowd is composed mostly of whiner douche-bags. The rest of us are masochists so far as I can tell.
After getting my head ripped off for mentioning that I liked operator overloading the other day, I'm trying to figure out why I still post here. I dunno if the crowd is getting nastier or now that I'm far removed from being a teenager, I see how bad it always was. I can't have a reasonable discussion on this site anymore without some asshat hijacking it and turning it into a flame fest.
And we're seeing a lot of speed improvements coming down the pike with Ruby 1.9 and Rails itself should prove to be significantly leaner and more modular with Rails 3.
I prefer Ruby to Python in a big way, but the O'Reilly "Learning Python" is above and below my preference for teaching anyone (young or older) who is interested in getting in to programming. Whitespace issues can be a little frustrating, but aside from that Python is a good starting language that can go in virtually any direction. Web dev? Check. Simple games? Check. GUI? Check. A whole host of available libraries? Check. And that book is great. The tone is very friendly and I just found that, in general, the author introduced concepts in a good order and very well and clearly.
Nowadays I like to point people interested in programming at Python and fiddling with the web since it offers pretty quick results in a tangible way, practical skills that are in demand and going along with the web is generally database access and string processing which are very useful in most places.
I dunno that Ruby is a great place to start and "the Pickaxe book" is not exactly a great place to start. O'Reilly put out "The Ruby Programming Language" but that's not exactly an intro. (Good book though.)
Logo was great. I dunno that I'd recommend it for a 15-year-old but Logo was my first language at 6. I didn't even really realize I was programming. It sparked my interest in solving problems that mattered to me then. How do I draw a sword? How do I draw a multicolored star or flower? What about random colors?
I didn't learn a lot of conditionals, (by the time input beyond the code itself was an issue I'd discovered other languages) but I did learn looping and also learned how to break a problem down into smaller pieces with the the tools available which is really what programming is all about.
And what I dunno that I would say that 15-year-olds are going to be interested in string handling. It takes about 2 days of learning to program when you realize you aren't going to be writing video games in two days and so you think, "okay, what CAN I do that's useful now." A lot of kids are interested in things beyond games. I was about 15 when I first got on the web and any ambition I had for game programming died very quickly. Networking and the web became my interests from then on.
You're right. Stupid web designers. We should just do away with everything but text. In fact, we should just all go back to using terminals. Anything else just steals resources.
There are other nice fonts for reading out there, even sans-serif ones.
However, the primary use for this sort of thing is not for the majority of content. The morons who use some weird script font with a drop shadow and a stroke on the main body font are the same asshats who put bright blue comic sans on a bight red background on their Geocities page. You can't stop people from posting bad stuff on the web. That doesn't mean we should be wondering, "Why do we need..."
Titles and other text that can rightfully be stylized should be without having to create images is a win on a massive level. People who know what they're doing can make better designs WITHOUT having to turn everything into an image. This means fewer HTTP requests, among other things. (Like better scaling for accessibility reasons.)
Uh-huh. It's the content. That's the ONLY important thing. Except... that's not how anything plays out in reality.
If you need fancy fonts, your site doesn't suck. Most sites already use fancy fonts, they're just converted into images which makes them WAY less useful. Being able to choose a font, set the color and being able to set a stroke or a drop shadow on it is significantly better than using images for a number of reasons.
I can't wait till cultures and countries of the future start murdering one another which one has chosen the one true SCIENCE and which is just a bunch of scienceless heathens.
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
"Deny reality." Heh. If only religionists had so much faith.
Great... another person who probably overuses assumption.
Hint: Being a douche bag and making assumptions without context is just like being a fucking twirp: it should be used extremely sparingly, and every time you use it, you should think twice and make sure there isn't a better approach you could be using.
But hey, while we're on the assumption train should I just assume your another jack off functional programmer that thinks he knows everything? (Which, in and of itself is an assumption about functional programmers, but hey... most of the vocal functional programmers around here are assholes so with my limited context why not presume that all functional programmers are assholes and so... well... you must be one too.)
There are plenty of instances where operator overloading is legitimate. (You know, like Java internally overloading + for string concatenation.) When I make a method like.add() it's amazing how often that would be more programatically natural to use, oh I don't know, the fucking +. Combining two objects to form a concatenated object is another instance that it seems useful too, particularly if it returns a new instance. (In fact if it modifies either of the objects in question, that's a BAD use of "+".)
And how the fuck is inheritance something that should be used "sparingly"? It should be used--like every other thing in the programming universe--when it makes sense and when you need it. It makes a lot of sense in some projects and none in others. And--like every other thing in the programming universe--it's abused and misused. Shocking.
Abuse of operator overloading is no different than bad naming conventions for methods. Obviously, since you seem to know something about C# you probably also know that no one is forcing you or anyone else to utilize operator overloading at all in any language.
Slashdot Mirror
Which sucks, because if you have a Mac Laptop you almost never shut it down or reboot. I use this feature ONLY when I know I'm going to have to be on battery for an extended period of time. It'd be nice to ONLY turn on the discrete graphics when I need them (which isn't all that often) but I don't want to log out every time I just want to fire up a game or something.
Which would be a cool feature if it didn't require logging out every time the switch was made. As a result, I almost never use the feature since I almost never shut my Mac down.
The problem is, the current crap about the screens is all a matter of taste. It's almost as annoying as audiophiles.
Yeah, it does. Two extremist (and really, they don't even have to be extremist) factions who hate each other can be completely wrong. Rarely is there a situation in a world as subjective as politics where a question only has two possible answers.
The problem with most political "solutions" is that they treat symptoms directly instead of asking questions like, "How did we come to this?" Whether or not to socialize medicine is one such arena.
"Thanks to TV and for the convenience of TV, you can only be one of two kinds of human beings, either a liberal or a conservative." -- Kurt Vonnegut
As I always say, "There's no reason both sides can't be completely wrong."
I might check that out. Someone further down this thread mentioned Arch, and while they're not Debian based (I just like apt) they seem to be just what the doctor ordered. However, I'll give this distro a look too.
Is there a GOOD Debian based KDE distro?
Not that I'm on either side of this but...
Is there some kind of brand of HD that doesn't "wear out"?
And grow your own if you have the time and space (which really, doesn't take as much as most people think). Do your own composting and life's even better.
"Organic" foods are just another way to overcharge the for the "green" fad (and for the most part, that's what it is, a fad) and the privilege of feeling good.
Although, I gotta say, it does start to get old and feel old that EVERYTHING is a fucking scam.
Ha. Yes. You did indeed fix that for me.
(And I got modded insightful for my own whining? WTF?)
Because the slashdot crowd is composed mostly of whiner douche-bags. The rest of us are masochists so far as I can tell.
After getting my head ripped off for mentioning that I liked operator overloading the other day, I'm trying to figure out why I still post here. I dunno if the crowd is getting nastier or now that I'm far removed from being a teenager, I see how bad it always was. I can't have a reasonable discussion on this site anymore without some asshat hijacking it and turning it into a flame fest.
And we're seeing a lot of speed improvements coming down the pike with Ruby 1.9 and Rails itself should prove to be significantly leaner and more modular with Rails 3.
Frankly, of all the universes I would like to see exploited in an MMO, this is #1, with something based in a Cowboy Bebop universe being #2.
I liked both the Sega and SNES games. I've always liked the universe.
I prefer Ruby to Python in a big way, but the O'Reilly "Learning Python" is above and below my preference for teaching anyone (young or older) who is interested in getting in to programming. Whitespace issues can be a little frustrating, but aside from that Python is a good starting language that can go in virtually any direction. Web dev? Check. Simple games? Check. GUI? Check. A whole host of available libraries? Check. And that book is great. The tone is very friendly and I just found that, in general, the author introduced concepts in a good order and very well and clearly.
Nowadays I like to point people interested in programming at Python and fiddling with the web since it offers pretty quick results in a tangible way, practical skills that are in demand and going along with the web is generally database access and string processing which are very useful in most places.
I dunno that Ruby is a great place to start and "the Pickaxe book" is not exactly a great place to start. O'Reilly put out "The Ruby Programming Language" but that's not exactly an intro. (Good book though.)
Why, may I ask, is OOP bad to learn from the start? What makes procedural better for the budding programmer?
Logo was great. I dunno that I'd recommend it for a 15-year-old but Logo was my first language at 6. I didn't even really realize I was programming. It sparked my interest in solving problems that mattered to me then. How do I draw a sword? How do I draw a multicolored star or flower? What about random colors?
I didn't learn a lot of conditionals, (by the time input beyond the code itself was an issue I'd discovered other languages) but I did learn looping and also learned how to break a problem down into smaller pieces with the the tools available which is really what programming is all about.
And what I dunno that I would say that 15-year-olds are going to be interested in string handling. It takes about 2 days of learning to program when you realize you aren't going to be writing video games in two days and so you think, "okay, what CAN I do that's useful now." A lot of kids are interested in things beyond games. I was about 15 when I first got on the web and any ambition I had for game programming died very quickly. Networking and the web became my interests from then on.
And operator overloading.
After my stint in the online dating world I realized one thing:
"Average is the new fat."
"BTW .. facile is a snooty word for easy. Maybe that's part of your problem."
Forget the haters... that was fucking hilarious.
You're right. Stupid web designers. We should just do away with everything but text. In fact, we should just all go back to using terminals. Anything else just steals resources.
There are other nice fonts for reading out there, even sans-serif ones.
However, the primary use for this sort of thing is not for the majority of content. The morons who use some weird script font with a drop shadow and a stroke on the main body font are the same asshats who put bright blue comic sans on a bight red background on their Geocities page. You can't stop people from posting bad stuff on the web. That doesn't mean we should be wondering, "Why do we need..."
Titles and other text that can rightfully be stylized should be without having to create images is a win on a massive level. People who know what they're doing can make better designs WITHOUT having to turn everything into an image. This means fewer HTTP requests, among other things. (Like better scaling for accessibility reasons.)
Uh-huh. It's the content. That's the ONLY important thing. Except... that's not how anything plays out in reality.
If you need fancy fonts, your site doesn't suck. Most sites already use fancy fonts, they're just converted into images which makes them WAY less useful. Being able to choose a font, set the color and being able to set a stroke or a drop shadow on it is significantly better than using images for a number of reasons.
Firefox does though, so I fail to see the problem.
I'm glad we're seeing this now.
I can't wait till cultures and countries of the future start murdering one another which one has chosen the one true SCIENCE and which is just a bunch of scienceless heathens.
The more things change, the more things stay the same.
"Deny reality." Heh. If only religionists had so much faith.
Great... another person who probably overuses assumption.
Hint: Being a douche bag and making assumptions without context is just like being a fucking twirp: it should be used extremely sparingly, and every time you use it, you should think twice and make sure there isn't a better approach you could be using.
But hey, while we're on the assumption train should I just assume your another jack off functional programmer that thinks he knows everything? (Which, in and of itself is an assumption about functional programmers, but hey... most of the vocal functional programmers around here are assholes so with my limited context why not presume that all functional programmers are assholes and so... well... you must be one too.)
There are plenty of instances where operator overloading is legitimate. (You know, like Java internally overloading + for string concatenation.) When I make a method like .add() it's amazing how often that would be more programatically natural to use, oh I don't know, the fucking +. Combining two objects to form a concatenated object is another instance that it seems useful too, particularly if it returns a new instance. (In fact if it modifies either of the objects in question, that's a BAD use of "+".)
And how the fuck is inheritance something that should be used "sparingly"? It should be used--like every other thing in the programming universe--when it makes sense and when you need it. It makes a lot of sense in some projects and none in others. And--like every other thing in the programming universe--it's abused and misused. Shocking.
Abuse of operator overloading is no different than bad naming conventions for methods. Obviously, since you seem to know something about C# you probably also know that no one is forcing you or anyone else to utilize operator overloading at all in any language.