But the probability that a particular programmer will screw up is lower in a language where a class of errors has been eliminated than in a language where those errors are possible.
The contract is binding only insofar as it is valid. A wall of fine print with complicated non-layman language is something that can be considered invalid. It is an advertised and marketed contract from a service provider to be signed by a consumer. That means there can't be just any kind of crap in there.
Sure. Why not? I don't see any reason the other party shouldn't expect me to keep my word. Even if you assume the body itself is inalienable the effect is the same.
Not if those words are forced on you, and in this and many other cases, they are indeed. This is not a contract between equals, don't forget that.
The cold boot attack is possible if the FBI cuts the power before breaking down the door, then you won't be able to overwrite the memory. Unless you have a UPS, in which case you could have it auto-unmount all encrypted drives after a few seconds warning.
It would make an interesting anaolgy with computers and the Internet, though. First, everyone is assumed to play by the rules, then suddenly all manner of viruses start to flourish.
You're right, it's not factorial, but rather... hmm, n*n-1? Or more simply, number of partner pairings * 2. That gives a multigraph with two edges between every partner. I realised that it's not clear what a poly relationship means, so with relationships I'm talking about some kind of "full" relationship.
If A and B are in a relationship, and also B and C are, but A and C are not.. that means that only B is in a poly relationship and A and C just have to approve of it. I would call that a semi-poly relationship, since not everyone is involved with each other. In particular, A and C would hardly consider themselves to be in a poly relationship. In any case, in "work" I'm also including the energy spent finding suitable partners. So to build a relationship between two people you first have to find one other person that you like, and who likes you. A relationship between three involves finding two people who you like, who like you, and who like each other, since if they don't like each other, you have a problem. Four people.... you get the idea.
Even if we take your example, A and C still have to approve of each other even if they're not in a relationship. Let's call that a half-edge, which would give 5 edges versus 2 in a mono relationship. And finally, even though everyone in a group are fine with each other, jealousy can still easily spring up and wreck things, greedy as we humans are.
In this way, a monogamous relationship is not just the the simplest workable relationship (which is obvious), but the simplest with a sizeable margin. My argument is that this margin (2 vs. 6 edges (or 2 vs. ~5)) is larger than the (total) benefit in most cases. That doesn't mean poly relationships are in any way impossible or a bad idea, it's just infeasible most of the time, or for most people, or for extended periods of time.
Technically, nothing has to change at all. But it will anyway, unless you go in to the relationship with the full understanding that you are not completely devoted to each other. Presumably, you don't want the other to leave you for some other person, so the amount of trust it takes is enormous. Not impossible, just difficult.
The problem with polyamorous relationships is that the number of relations that need to work increase dramatically. With 2 people it's just two relations. With three, it's already 6 relations. With n people, it's n!. Hence two is the optimum that gives the most payoff for the least amount of work, not taking into account temporary arrangements (affairs).
Yes, a situation might be that you don't want to exit the JVM just because of a random unchecked error somewhere. Anyway, commenting every empty catch block should be mandatory in the Java specs. I put in at the very least a//NOOP just to show that I acknowledge that it's empty, and that there's no need to act upon the exception. Or a//TODO if it's half-finished.
Re:My opinion of what Java APIs are worth learning
on
Java, Where To Start?
·
· Score: 1
I would put IO before reflection, since I've had much more use of it. But I agree with command line compiling to learn. If you need to code GUIs, once you know the basics, NetBeans has a nice editor for generating the UI code without too much hassle.
I agree. The standard library is the most important library of them all. Many people seem to fancy rolling their own when they need something, without realising that it's already in the standard library. For instance, a couple of years went by before I realised that there's a Logger class to handle all logging needs.
As far as I know and can see, there are no must-have frameworks or libraries, only sometimes-good-to-use frameworks and libraries.
Speaking of exceptions, do not catch Exception, and do not catch Throwable, unless you know exactly why you should do that.
Note that a high water level is somewhat less desirable when you produce a cork-floater. And how would a low water level result in getting shit all over your ass? Also, low water isn't related to small pipe entrance, necessarily.
Yep. Most people don't really mind, or don't care, or are willing to understand and learn something new, while a few people are and remain dicks. Though it's easy to forget, this simple truth applies across all cultural borders.
I know one guy who sometimes preempted the heated discussions by saying that when introducing himself. He was from Texas, so it may have been necessary, now that I think of it.
Slashdot Mirror
Ctrl-Alt-F1 works fine for me.
But the probability that a particular programmer will screw up is lower in a language where a class of errors has been eliminated than in a language where those errors are possible.
For the love of the rest of the user base, stop reading idle!
And then you give the key to the outer Truecrypt partition, of course.
The contract is binding only insofar as it is valid. A wall of fine print with complicated non-layman language is something that can be considered invalid. It is an advertised and marketed contract from a service provider to be signed by a consumer. That means there can't be just any kind of crap in there.
Sure. Why not? I don't see any reason the other party shouldn't expect me to keep my word. Even if you assume the body itself is inalienable the effect is the same.
Not if those words are forced on you, and in this and many other cases, they are indeed. This is not a contract between equals, don't forget that.
The cold boot attack is possible if the FBI cuts the power before breaking down the door, then you won't be able to overwrite the memory. Unless you have a UPS, in which case you could have it auto-unmount all encrypted drives after a few seconds warning.
He sounds like he needs to slow down once in a while..
It would make an interesting anaolgy with computers and the Internet, though. First, everyone is assumed to play by the rules, then suddenly all manner of viruses start to flourish.
If A and B are in a relationship, and also B and C are, but A and C are not.. that means that only B is in a poly relationship and A and C just have to approve of it. I would call that a semi-poly relationship, since not everyone is involved with each other. In particular, A and C would hardly consider themselves to be in a poly relationship. In any case, in "work" I'm also including the energy spent finding suitable partners. So to build a relationship between two people you first have to find one other person that you like, and who likes you. A relationship between three involves finding two people who you like, who like you, and who like each other, since if they don't like each other, you have a problem. Four people.... you get the idea.
Even if we take your example, A and C still have to approve of each other even if they're not in a relationship. Let's call that a half-edge, which would give 5 edges versus 2 in a mono relationship. And finally, even though everyone in a group are fine with each other, jealousy can still easily spring up and wreck things, greedy as we humans are.
In this way, a monogamous relationship is not just the the simplest workable relationship (which is obvious), but the simplest with a sizeable margin. My argument is that this margin (2 vs. 6 edges (or 2 vs. ~5)) is larger than the (total) benefit in most cases. That doesn't mean poly relationships are in any way impossible or a bad idea, it's just infeasible most of the time, or for most people, or for extended periods of time.
But why the name change? And where is the Casual Organised Crimes Agency, COCA?
You can customize the gestures, actually, it's in the shortcuts section of the preferences.
You mean it's unclear whether it's a joke? "Standard eight-grade sex" FTW.
Not exactly, back in the early days there wasn't any technology to clean up factory exhaust before releasing it, but there is a choice now.
Technically, nothing has to change at all. But it will anyway, unless you go in to the relationship with the full understanding that you are not completely devoted to each other. Presumably, you don't want the other to leave you for some other person, so the amount of trust it takes is enormous. Not impossible, just difficult.
The problem with polyamorous relationships is that the number of relations that need to work increase dramatically. With 2 people it's just two relations. With three, it's already 6 relations. With n people, it's n!. Hence two is the optimum that gives the most payoff for the least amount of work, not taking into account temporary arrangements (affairs).
Like it or not, the license is important.
Yes, a situation might be that you don't want to exit the JVM just because of a random unchecked error somewhere. Anyway, commenting every empty catch block should be mandatory in the Java specs. I put in at the very least a //NOOP just to show that I acknowledge that it's empty, and that there's no need to act upon the exception. Or a //TODO if it's half-finished.
I would put IO before reflection, since I've had much more use of it. But I agree with command line compiling to learn. If you need to code GUIs, once you know the basics, NetBeans has a nice editor for generating the UI code without too much hassle.
As far as I know and can see, there are no must-have frameworks or libraries, only sometimes-good-to-use frameworks and libraries.
Speaking of exceptions, do not catch Exception, and do not catch Throwable, unless you know exactly why you should do that.
Ah, ok. But that's just a badly designed toilet in general.
Note that a high water level is somewhat less desirable when you produce a cork-floater. And how would a low water level result in getting shit all over your ass? Also, low water isn't related to small pipe entrance, necessarily.
I don't think there's any uniformity whatsoever regarding toilets around Europe, so YMMV.
Yep. Most people don't really mind, or don't care, or are willing to understand and learn something new, while a few people are and remain dicks. Though it's easy to forget, this simple truth applies across all cultural borders.
"Oh, I hate Bush too".
I know one guy who sometimes preempted the heated discussions by saying that when introducing himself. He was from Texas, so it may have been necessary, now that I think of it.