And you may tell yourself This is not my beautiful house! And you may tell yourself This is not my beautiful wife! And you may ask yourself, "Self, how did I get here?"
Do you seriously believe those guys potentially capable of abusing children (and/or paying to watch) are going to... think to themselves "This is great, no one got harmed!"
Hey, there is a big difference between abusers and just-wanna-watchers. And yes, a just-wanna-watch is going to think exactly that: "Yay, no one got hurt, I can watch this CG stuff with a clear conscience!"
It takes a fairly skilled individual to make realistic looking CG, but anyone with a camera and access to a child can produce kiddie porn without needing much skill at all.
True -- now. But in five years? Probably not true. Once a law gets on the books, it is there for a long time. Laws require long-term thinking. If a law won't make sense in only five years, it is better to have not passed it in the first place.
The argument for banning CG "child porn" (and presumably that produced entirely by a human artist) tends to be either that it is difficult to distinguish from actual photographs or that photographs can me modified in such a way which is difficult to tell from CGI.
That's not an argument, that's a couple of statements about CG CP. Okay, fine: it is difficult to distinguish the CG stuff from the real stuff. But why does that mean it makes sense to ban the CG stuff? That part of the argument is missing.
I was going to say there are no upsides for anyone but Apple, but that is not quite true.
By moving to Cocoa, apps get more of the built-in "correct" behaviors that really tie a system together, and can take advantage of new technologies as Apple develops them (for example, if Apple updates Core Data to work with a database-based filesystem or something).
Plus, no one can seriously believe that Apple will maintain Carbon forever.
I read the political articles more for entertainment than anything else. Slashdot has a lot of high school and college age users and I find their optimism fun to read.
Heh, yeah. "Aww, it's so cute how they still have hopes and dreams for a better world!"
Obama is full of shit just like an other politician and because Hillary again proved, with her inaction re: retroactive immunity for telecoms (she didn't even vote), that she's a fence riding cunt trying to pander to everyone -- I cannot vote for her either. This is going to be a very difficult decision for me.
Something to consider that might help. Given that either Obama or Hillary will screw us over domestically, it is a wash as to which one you might choose. But one of the duties of the President is to act as a figure-head for the United States: our representative to the the rest of the world. Which one would help us out the most internationally?
For that purpose, you want the most full-of-shit -- but believable and charismatic -- politician you can get in the office of President. Other nations would be more impressed by Obama as President then Hillary, on a purely racial basis. Female heads-of-state aren't uncommon, but black ones in predominately white countries are less so. Also, Obama is likely to be more favored among Muslim nations (though from their perspective it might be a case of "slightly less obnoxious of two evils").
But at this point, your choices are simpler. Obama already HAS the nomination. You just have to choose between him and McCain, or vote a third party.
In the article, they say the multiple cores will have a big impact on the design of databases. I don't understand this. Databases are already threaded, are they not? Why does multi-core support require different code than multi-thread support?
Lambda calculus is very powerful, but I've not seen any simple examples that actually demonstrated the power beyond what you could achieve with standard programming constructs. Closures are nice for things like sorting, UI events, and such--but inner classes are even nicer because they can carry data too in a more obvious way (instead of simply by scoping rules).
Dylan combines the two in its exception-handling system. I did something similar to the following recently. It is slightly hacky, but I didn't want to pass the uncertain-entries variable everywhere when it was only used in one place, and I didn't want to make a global for it. let (known-entries, uncertain-entries) = resolve-values(...);
let handler <need-uncertain-entries>
= method (exception, next-handler)
uncertain-entries
end method;
process-contents(known-entries);
Elsewhere, in a different file entirely, but called indirectly by process-contents... if (entry-not-found)
error("%s not known; maybe you mean one of %s?", entry,
signal(make(<need-uncertain-entries>))) end if;
The let handler makes an exception handler. The handler is a method -- a.k.a. a closure or lambda -- that is called to handle the %lt;need-uncertain-entries> exception. The handler's return value is returned by signal. I could also have returned a class or other structured data, like an inner class.
Basically, I used a closure to get data I didn't have in scope.
Sounds pretty good. I am intrigued by how cities can rise or fall. I'm not big into PvP, but I'll probably try it out for that game -- if it comes out for Mac, of course.
The graphics look pretty detailed, and the breadth of costume choice looks good, but maybe too much uncanny valley there.
Really, I did it as a hobby, and didn't want the moral obligations coming from accepting money.
What moral obligation? It's a gift. The only moral obligations with gifts are not to re-gift them and not to hock them for cash. And if the gift is money, they are not issues.
I'm not sure if you're serious or not, but I get tired of the whole 'man is the ultimate evil' thing, especially since a lot of the people who believe that back it up with baseless information.
You are now entering... the Scary Door.
[Scientist mixes vials labeled with different animals.]
Scientist: I have combined the DNA of the world's most evil animals to form the most evil creature of all!
[Scientist pours mixture into cylindrical device. Steam hisses from the cylinder, door opens, a miniature dude steps out.]
I'd hate to think creepy old men could walk up to little girls in the mall and say "I'm the mall manager you need to come with me we believe you have shoplifted" or "Your mommy has been hurt and told me to come get you" and that's not somehow illegal.
That is unethical and immoral. So was Lori Drew's fake Josh Evans. But they aren't illegal. The problem is the difference between law and ethics. You can decide the ethics of any novel situation, but a law only applies if it is written to apply. Ethics inherently considers the motives of the parties involved, but laws cannot effectively consider motives, because how do you know?
This is the way it should be; laws can send you to jail, so you don't want the law to take you by surprise. You don't want ambiguity, you want to rely on precedent, you don't want new laws to apply to you retroactively, and you don't want to able to be falsely convicted because someone lies about you convincingly. If there was no existing law applicable to Lori Drew, then she gets off scot-free.
What is missing here is an extra-legal way of dealing with creepy old men and Lori Drew. Back when we lived in small villages, if something like this happened, everyone know that the person done wrong, and everyone snubbed them or judged them or whatever. We're too populous for that stuff to work anymore. The only people in a position to punish Lori Drew are the people who know her.
I don't see why so many handlers are needed. Build two big arches and stretch a net between them. Pilot the zepp between the arches. Pad the arches in case of crosswinds. When the zepp is pretty well between the arches, start retracting the net towards the ground. Bob's your uncle.
For ground winds, what's wrong with using air bags to keep the zepp from being damaged by being slammed into the ground? Or, maybe the zepp can be tethered to an extending gantry or an elevator on a crane, to get it clear of ground winds before being launched. Or, better, maybe a tetherd sail can be used to stabilize the zepp, like they've developed for cargo ships.
Point is, with computers and all, we can work smarter and safer, instead of throwing bodies at the problem.
Question 2. Do you want us to have the power to know what you buy online, what your daughter looks like in a bikini, and read the email you sent to your working-away-from-home husband (Paul) with that photo of you(?) in the black and scarlet red corset (and not much else)?
The completely functional optimizing commandline compilers for C++, C# and VB are freely downloadable. The IDE with most designer support and full debugger support is freely downloadable.
Um. No. Visual Studio Express does not let you debug threads, or attach the debugger to a processes, or develop services, or do conditional breakpoints, or refactor (other than renaming and extracting methods), or use MFC or ATL, or develop 64-bit apps, or edit resources.
As soon as you want to do anything fancy to interact with the underlying OS or other apps, it usually becomes necessary to start playing with COM wrappers and P/Invoke on at least some level.
It doesn't even have to be anything fancy. I wanted to break a command-line parameter up into into directories, filenames, and extensions. I wanted the OS to make the decisions about what the drive is, which part was the extension, and whether the thing was quoted. I had to use P/Invoke to do this.
The analogy with Aristotle's Law of Motion and Newton's Second Law against circuit design theory (basically, charge:flux:: force:acceleration is correct, and charge:voltage:: force:velocity is wrong) is the most interesting thing in the EE Times article.
Slashdot Mirror
And you may tell yourself
This is not my beautiful house!
And you may tell yourself
This is not my beautiful wife!
And you may ask yourself,
"Self, how did I get here?"
Do you seriously believe those guys potentially capable of abusing children (and/or paying to watch) are going to ... think to themselves "This is great, no one got harmed!"
Hey, there is a big difference between abusers and just-wanna-watchers. And yes, a just-wanna-watch is going to think exactly that: "Yay, no one got hurt, I can watch this CG stuff with a clear conscience!"
It takes a fairly skilled individual to make realistic looking CG, but anyone with a camera and access to a child can produce kiddie porn without needing much skill at all.
True -- now. But in five years? Probably not true. Once a law gets on the books, it is there for a long time. Laws require long-term thinking. If a law won't make sense in only five years, it is better to have not passed it in the first place.
The argument for banning CG "child porn" (and presumably that produced entirely by a human artist) tends to be either that it is difficult to distinguish from actual photographs or that photographs can me modified in such a way which is difficult to tell from CGI.
That's not an argument, that's a couple of statements about CG CP. Okay, fine: it is difficult to distinguish the CG stuff from the real stuff. But why does that mean it makes sense to ban the CG stuff? That part of the argument is missing.
Everytime you say "pr0n," a kitten loses its wings...
I was going to say there are no upsides for anyone but Apple, but that is not quite true.
By moving to Cocoa, apps get more of the built-in "correct" behaviors that really tie a system together, and can take advantage of new technologies as Apple develops them (for example, if Apple updates Core Data to work with a database-based filesystem or something).
Plus, no one can seriously believe that Apple will maintain Carbon forever.
I read the political articles more for entertainment than anything else. Slashdot has a lot of high school and college age users and I find their optimism fun to read.
Heh, yeah. "Aww, it's so cute how they still have hopes and dreams for a better world!"
Obama is full of shit just like an other politician and because Hillary again proved, with her inaction re: retroactive immunity for telecoms (she didn't even vote), that she's a fence riding cunt trying to pander to everyone -- I cannot vote for her either. This is going to be a very difficult decision for me.
Something to consider that might help. Given that either Obama or Hillary will screw us over domestically, it is a wash as to which one you might choose. But one of the duties of the President is to act as a figure-head for the United States: our representative to the the rest of the world. Which one would help us out the most internationally?
For that purpose, you want the most full-of-shit -- but believable and charismatic -- politician you can get in the office of President. Other nations would be more impressed by Obama as President then Hillary, on a purely racial basis. Female heads-of-state aren't uncommon, but black ones in predominately white countries are less so. Also, Obama is likely to be more favored among Muslim nations (though from their perspective it might be a case of "slightly less obnoxious of two evils").
But at this point, your choices are simpler. Obama already HAS the nomination. You just have to choose between him and McCain, or vote a third party.
In the article, they say the multiple cores will have a big impact on the design of databases. I don't understand this. Databases are already threaded, are they not? Why does multi-core support require different code than multi-thread support?
Lambda calculus is very powerful, but I've not seen any simple examples that actually demonstrated the power beyond what you could achieve with standard programming constructs. Closures are nice for things like sorting, UI events, and such--but inner classes are even nicer because they can carry data too in a more obvious way (instead of simply by scoping rules).
Dylan combines the two in its exception-handling system. I did something similar to the following recently. It is slightly hacky, but I didn't want to pass the uncertain-entries variable everywhere when it was only used in one place, and I didn't want to make a global for it.
let (known-entries, uncertain-entries) = resolve-values(...);
let handler <need-uncertain-entries>
= method (exception, next-handler)
uncertain-entries
end method;
process-contents(known-entries);
Elsewhere, in a different file entirely, but called indirectly by process-contents...
if (entry-not-found)
error("%s not known; maybe you mean one of %s?", entry,
signal(make(<need-uncertain-entries>)))
end if;
The let handler makes an exception handler. The handler is a method -- a.k.a. a closure or lambda -- that is called to handle the %lt;need-uncertain-entries> exception. The handler's return value is returned by signal. I could also have returned a class or other structured data, like an inner class.
Basically, I used a closure to get data I didn't have in scope.
Sounds pretty good. I am intrigued by how cities can rise or fall. I'm not big into PvP, but I'll probably try it out for that game -- if it comes out for Mac, of course.
The graphics look pretty detailed, and the breadth of costume choice looks good, but maybe too much uncanny valley there.
Really, I did it as a hobby, and didn't want the moral obligations coming from accepting money.
What moral obligation? It's a gift. The only moral obligations with gifts are not to re-gift them and not to hock them for cash. And if the gift is money, they are not issues.
AutoCAD is used for more than just architecture, for example, designing refrigerators or machining.
Privacy:
Ur doin it wrong
Bucket overflow error?
I can haz mo bukkit?
Linux (kernel) is very aggressive against rouge programs.
How does it react to mascara programs?
I'm not sure if you're serious or not, but I get tired of the whole 'man is the ultimate evil' thing, especially since a lot of the people who believe that back it up with baseless information.
You are now entering... the Scary Door.
[Scientist mixes vials labeled with different animals.]
Scientist: I have combined the DNA of the world's most evil animals to form the most evil creature of all!
[Scientist pours mixture into cylindrical device. Steam hisses from the cylinder, door opens, a miniature dude steps out.]
Miniature dude: Turns out it's man.
[End credits]
I'd hate to think creepy old men could walk up to little girls in the mall and say "I'm the mall manager you need to come with me we believe you have shoplifted" or "Your mommy has been hurt and told me to come get you" and that's not somehow illegal.
That is unethical and immoral. So was Lori Drew's fake Josh Evans. But they aren't illegal. The problem is the difference between law and ethics. You can decide the ethics of any novel situation, but a law only applies if it is written to apply. Ethics inherently considers the motives of the parties involved, but laws cannot effectively consider motives, because how do you know?
This is the way it should be; laws can send you to jail, so you don't want the law to take you by surprise. You don't want ambiguity, you want to rely on precedent, you don't want new laws to apply to you retroactively, and you don't want to able to be falsely convicted because someone lies about you convincingly. If there was no existing law applicable to Lori Drew, then she gets off scot-free.
What is missing here is an extra-legal way of dealing with creepy old men and Lori Drew. Back when we lived in small villages, if something like this happened, everyone know that the person done wrong, and everyone snubbed them or judged them or whatever. We're too populous for that stuff to work anymore. The only people in a position to punish Lori Drew are the people who know her.
I don't see why so many handlers are needed. Build two big arches and stretch a net between them. Pilot the zepp between the arches. Pad the arches in case of crosswinds. When the zepp is pretty well between the arches, start retracting the net towards the ground. Bob's your uncle.
For ground winds, what's wrong with using air bags to keep the zepp from being damaged by being slammed into the ground? Or, maybe the zepp can be tethered to an extending gantry or an elevator on a crane, to get it clear of ground winds before being launched. Or, better, maybe a tetherd sail can be used to stabilize the zepp, like they've developed for cargo ships.
Point is, with computers and all, we can work smarter and safer, instead of throwing bodies at the problem.
Question 2. Do you want us to have the power to know what you buy online, what your daughter looks like in a bikini, and read the email you sent to your working-away-from-home husband (Paul) with that photo of you(?) in the black and scarlet red corset (and not much else)?
Well, I'd have to see the photos to make sure...
Pics plz!
The completely functional optimizing commandline compilers for C++, C# and VB are freely downloadable. The IDE with most designer support and full debugger support is freely downloadable.
Um. No. Visual Studio Express does not let you debug threads, or attach the debugger to a processes, or develop services, or do conditional breakpoints, or refactor (other than renaming and extracting methods), or use MFC or ATL, or develop 64-bit apps, or edit resources.
As soon as you want to do anything fancy to interact with the underlying OS or other apps, it usually becomes necessary to start playing with COM wrappers and P/Invoke on at least some level.
It doesn't even have to be anything fancy. I wanted to break a command-line parameter up into into directories, filenames, and extensions. I wanted the OS to make the decisions about what the drive is, which part was the extension, and whether the thing was quoted. I had to use P/Invoke to do this.
? is PRINT in a lot of BASICs, not just Sinclairs.
Wasn't it INPUT in some, though?
The analogy with Aristotle's Law of Motion and Newton's Second Law against circuit design theory (basically, charge:flux :: force:acceleration is correct, and charge:voltage :: force:velocity is wrong) is the most interesting thing in the EE Times article.
I'd love to hear comments about that.
I've got footage of a droid breaking into my home. And he went for the PC, not the television, go figure...
Ah, to be young again, and in love! -- and also a robot!