Must be in marketing. They seem to love adding "ization" to a word that is perfectly serviceable on its own. Utilization instead of use, moisturization instead of moisture, and grammarization instead of grammar... Of cours,e if you aren't in market I appologize. But maybe you have found a new calling. (Just keep repeating "The implementation of the rollout will be facilitated by a scalable three tier networking solution...")
Agreed. And you missed one argument: Sometimes there is no FS/OS version. I had to translate a Quark document to text at work. I run FreeBSD (yes,yes, FBSD is dead, yada yada...). Anyway, there was no way to translate Quark to anything else that would run on *BSD or Linux. One script which was horribly broken, that's it. In the end, I ahd a coworker with an MS desktop download the demo version of Quark to convert the files. Yet one more reason windows emulation is not a bad idea.
I have to agree. I am old enough to remember the coleco-vision expansion set that would turn it into a "personal computer". Didn't do too well. I doubt it would do any better on more recent game consoles.
Ranked 1st if counted as a single country?
Um, it is 2nd in both figures you give. (Well, 2nd of 2). What does this Ranked 1st mean? First in what? You already said GDP is lower, GDP per capita is lower. I don't follow.
I have a hard time caring one way or the other. Coming from a state where the dead vote regularly using paper ballots, I don't think electronic voting will introduce more corruption (I don't think that would be possible.) Corruption is possible under any system, and, given my one-party state with decades of experience with "vote early, vote often", I just can't get worked up over the possibility that some new sort of corruption could take place.
Only if you are using an object oriented language. UML->C or UML->assembly is a lot more work than you suggest. (Yes, some of us still use non-OO languages)
Coding by hand is still not a great test of ability. In the real world half of a programmer's skill is in fixing the errors found in code (his own or others'). I don't know about the uber-leet types here, but I know my first draft of code always has at least a few trivial typos and maybe a few real bugs. The fact that I can get it to run on time is what matters, not my ability to write perfect source on the first try. (That said, I had to generate perfect code by hand for a number of course. So I know that is the way tests are run everywhere. But I still think it is not the best test of real world skills.)
Fair enough. I wrote this quickly while at work, so the terminology was not as precise as it should have been. I also forgot to add valuation difference from preferences for income growth vs. value growth (as related to dividend payment), public perception of future market instability, expectations of concerning future rates of inflation (not part of current NPV calculations), and so on.
Not quite right: 1. It shouldn't be X in (TA-TL)+X, but the Net Present Value of X, as time preference figures into it. 2. X is the sum of all future expected revenue minus all future expected losses, not the revenues for any fixed time horizon (Though NPV approaches 0 for the more distant future.). 3. The price of a stock is actually often only partially related to the "technical" value, as the subjective valuations of a huge number of investors can set a value with little relationship to any technical analysis of the stock's value. Otherwise, as a description of technical analysis of stock value, you are correct.
I suppose it is true that 20,000 + savings of cheaper hardware > 15000. But wouldn't it make more sense to say "saved over 20000" in the first paragraph. Just a tiny, relatively OT nit.
I had the misfortune to start an MS in CS after 5+ years working in the field. The technical courses were fine, but they were about 20% of the requirements. The rest were "theory of design" or "project management" or similar management oriented course which were incredibly out of touch with the realities of the field. Not that such matters are unimportant, but they shouldn't be 80% of CS coursework, nor should they completely ignore the ways in which actual employers operate.
Perhaps I should have been more specific concerning this particular company. Not only did we provide filters to stop the mail our customers generated. We also sold boxes to hosting companies, but then shut down THEIR clients if we thought they were spamming. But we did nothing about the "marketing" sites WE hosted. It seems the difference between marketing and spamming is who gets the largest percentage of their fees. (Okay, maybe a bit OT for this topic, but I just thought MS shouldn't get all the "credit" for really bad spam policies.)
I recall trying to tell a coworker his logic wouldn't work because he wasn't following deMorgan's law (the !(x|y) result he wanted was written as !(x&y), not as (!x & !y)). I spent over an hour trying to convince him. He ignored it, said "perl logic doesn't work that way", and, then about two days later, came to ask how to fix it when it kept failing. So, it seems you can try to do it without understanding math/logic, but you may run into a few problems.
If I recall correctly, proftpd used a rather draconian chroot scheme, yet it had a number of security holes. (This was appx. 1 year ago). It seems to argue that chroot may be a bit dangerous by promising a false security it can't always deliver.
It doesn't matter how you guard your email address. Unless it is a senseless string of characters, someone will eventually send to it. I saw spammers trying huge (10K+ entry) lists of randomly generated lists of names (aaab@aol.com, aaac@aol.com,aaad@aol.com, and so on). Then they would try adding different domains to names known from a first domain (jims@aol.com, jims@hotmail.com, and so on...) You can't just guard your address. Someone will still find you to deliver spam.
My old employer (a web-hosting company which shall remain nameless) did almost the same a few years ago. They hosted hundreds of "marketers" (yes, we used the same euphemism), who spammed like crazy from our boxes, then they turned around and sold spam filtering services to their other clients. Nice to profit off the problem you helped create.
Does it really matter if they add a "you must notify the user" law to the books? The spyware just gets an extra line added to the EULA for any commercial app. One line among thousands, how many people will read the agreement to see if there is a spyware clause? But they agreed to it when they installed. Hence, it is no longer illegal.
Slashdot Mirror
Must be in marketing. They seem to love adding "ization" to a word that is perfectly serviceable on its own. Utilization instead of use, moisturization instead of moisture, and grammarization instead of grammar... Of cours,e if you aren't in market I appologize. But maybe you have found a new calling. (Just keep repeating "The implementation of the rollout will be facilitated by a scalable three tier networking solution...")
Agreed. And you missed one argument: Sometimes there is no FS/OS version. I had to translate a Quark document to text at work. I run FreeBSD (yes,yes, FBSD is dead, yada yada...). Anyway, there was no way to translate Quark to anything else that would run on *BSD or Linux. One script which was horribly broken, that's it. In the end, I ahd a coworker with an MS desktop download the demo version of Quark to convert the files. Yet one more reason windows emulation is not a bad idea.
I have to agree. I am old enough to remember the coleco-vision expansion set that would turn it into a "personal computer". Didn't do too well. I doubt it would do any better on more recent game consoles.
Ranked 1st if counted as a single country? Um, it is 2nd in both figures you give. (Well, 2nd of 2). What does this Ranked 1st mean? First in what? You already said GDP is lower, GDP per capita is lower. I don't follow.
I have a hard time caring one way or the other. Coming from a state where the dead vote regularly using paper ballots, I don't think electronic voting will introduce more corruption (I don't think that would be possible.) Corruption is possible under any system, and, given my one-party state with decades of experience with "vote early, vote often", I just can't get worked up over the possibility that some new sort of corruption could take place.
Only if you are using an object oriented language. UML->C or UML->assembly is a lot more work than you suggest. (Yes, some of us still use non-OO languages)
Coding by hand is still not a great test of ability. In the real world half of a programmer's skill is in fixing the errors found in code (his own or others'). I don't know about the uber-leet types here, but I know my first draft of code always has at least a few trivial typos and maybe a few real bugs. The fact that I can get it to run on time is what matters, not my ability to write perfect source on the first try. (That said, I had to generate perfect code by hand for a number of course. So I know that is the way tests are run everywhere. But I still think it is not the best test of real world skills.)
s/of concerning/concerning/
yet another error. I should give up on being precise.
Fair enough. I wrote this quickly while at work, so the terminology was not as precise as it should have been. I also forgot to add valuation difference from preferences for income growth vs. value growth (as related to dividend payment), public perception of future market instability, expectations of concerning future rates of inflation (not part of current NPV calculations), and so on.
Not quite right: 1. It shouldn't be X in (TA-TL)+X, but the Net Present Value of X, as time preference figures into it. 2. X is the sum of all future expected revenue minus all future expected losses, not the revenues for any fixed time horizon (Though NPV approaches 0 for the more distant future.). 3. The price of a stock is actually often only partially related to the "technical" value, as the subjective valuations of a huge number of investors can set a value with little relationship to any technical analysis of the stock's value. Otherwise, as a description of technical analysis of stock value, you are correct.
one line (in c) a=a%b is a-=((a/b)*b)) --Unless some overly helpful optimizer decides to optimize it to a-=a, which results in 0.
I suppose it is true that 20,000 + savings of cheaper hardware > 15000. But wouldn't it make more sense to say "saved over 20000" in the first paragraph. Just a tiny, relatively OT nit.
I had the misfortune to start an MS in CS after 5+ years working in the field. The technical courses were fine, but they were about 20% of the requirements. The rest were "theory of design" or "project management" or similar management oriented course which were incredibly out of touch with the realities of the field. Not that such matters are unimportant, but they shouldn't be 80% of CS coursework, nor should they completely ignore the ways in which actual employers operate.
Perhaps I should have been more specific concerning this particular company. Not only did we provide filters to stop the mail our customers generated. We also sold boxes to hosting companies, but then shut down THEIR clients if we thought they were spamming. But we did nothing about the "marketing" sites WE hosted. It seems the difference between marketing and spamming is who gets the largest percentage of their fees. (Okay, maybe a bit OT for this topic, but I just thought MS shouldn't get all the "credit" for really bad spam policies.)
I recall trying to tell a coworker his logic wouldn't work because he wasn't following deMorgan's law (the !(x|y) result he wanted was written as !(x&y), not as (!x & !y)). I spent over an hour trying to convince him. He ignored it, said "perl logic doesn't work that way", and, then about two days later, came to ask how to fix it when it kept failing. So, it seems you can try to do it without understanding math/logic, but you may run into a few problems.
If I recall correctly, proftpd used a rather draconian chroot scheme, yet it had a number of security holes. (This was appx. 1 year ago). It seems to argue that chroot may be a bit dangerous by promising a false security it can't always deliver.
It doesn't matter how you guard your email address. Unless it is a senseless string of characters, someone will eventually send to it. I saw spammers trying huge (10K+ entry) lists of randomly generated lists of names (aaab@aol.com, aaac@aol.com,aaad@aol.com, and so on). Then they would try adding different domains to names known from a first domain (jims@aol.com, jims@hotmail.com, and so on...) You can't just guard your address. Someone will still find you to deliver spam.
My old employer (a web-hosting company which shall remain nameless) did almost the same a few years ago. They hosted hundreds of "marketers" (yes, we used the same euphemism), who spammed like crazy from our boxes, then they turned around and sold spam filtering services to their other clients. Nice to profit off the problem you helped create.
Speaking of buzzwords... why is "foof" slashdot's word of the day?
Because now we can have a whole new set of flame-wars over which codec is the best/fastest/most free (as in speech, or beer, or mumia, or bird...)
FOOF is 61455. I thought everyone knew that.
Does it really matter if they add a "you must notify the user" law to the books? The spyware just gets an extra line added to the EULA for any commercial app. One line among thousands, how many people will read the agreement to see if there is a spyware clause? But they agreed to it when they installed. Hence, it is no longer illegal.
His far-fetched stories live on, but no one remembers his name.
Techincally, :!man vi is onscreen help. Not well organized, or user-friendly. But you can get onscreen help from vi.
ESC is not really part of the command. It is part of the preceding insert. And you could just ZZ, which seems pretty simple.