And who cares about that TV station. According to polls, between 70% and 90% of Venezuelans.
IIRC, they are the ones that used to renfer to Chavez as "the nigger" on air. If a US TV station using the public airwaves said that about Jesse Jackson, it would be pulled in short order.,
This shows how ignorant you are. "Nigger" is a insult that does not exist in Venezuela. Calling someone a "Negro" in Venezuela is not a insult. If anything, it is an expresion of affection of admiration. It is so common, that one of the proposals of the opposition candidate in the last elections was a debit card called "Mi Negra" (my black -female-, or my "nigger" in your language). Racism is not an issue in Venezuela.
The Chavez government knows how racism is still an issue in developed countrie,and, among other things, tries to present the opposition as a white racist minority, as if we were in the colony 300 years ago. The fact that your country has been unable to solve the racism problem makes you believe that it is still a problem in our country. It is not.
They have even been inventing terms such as "afro-descendants", as if most dark skinned Venezuelans weren't of as mixed origin as most of the rest of the population.
Whatever Chavez has done, he has not yet refused to hold elections and he has been elected numerous times now in elections that have been certified by observers as legitimate. So the opposition should just suck it up.
SO we should let our rights be violated just because he had the majority?
And what kind of analysis is that? You decide that a video is right because it was made by foreigners (who were biased BTW) and sanctioned by (clueless) international distributors, and the debunkings are wrong because they were made by the opposition, without even looking at the content.
Your famous unbiased video does not even show the most crucial moment of April 11: when Chavez's highest ranking military officer announced that Chavez had resigned (see http://youtube.com/watch?v=DQ14XCNMY7k). So, I don't care if RTE is biased or clueless, but their video is misleading.
A lot of people here believe that it was RCTV who announced Chavez resignation in April 11 and not Chavez's highest-ranking military officer simply because what they know about those events is the version shown in "The Revolution will not be televised", which is nothing but propaganda.
With the closing of independent media now I understand why they say it will not be televised.
Castro isn't a tyrant. He has more than 40 years in power, has never been elected in free elections, killed thousands to seize power and imprisons disenters. How is that not a tyrant?
Things would be great in that country if not for the stupid american embargo. Things would be great if that country were a democracy were education and hard work facilitated social mobility. They keep saying they are a world power in medicine and technology. If they are as great as their supporters say, they would not need to deal with the empire. In fact, if communism is so great how come its poverty is blamed on them being unable to do business with a capitalist country? BTW, they do business with other capitalist countries. The business is basically that a foreign company operates and pays the government for the labor provided by Cubans and take big profits. Basically, a new form of slavery.
Forgive me for thinking the "diguise" of universal healthcare was a good idea. Its clearly a communist plot instated by a greedy power mad tyrant. Universal health care can exist in free and non-free countries.
Do you americans ever read history books not written by americans? I mean seriously. The "Cuba is teh evil" line is so fucking 30 years ago, and it wasnt even true then! I am not American and I have never read an American history book. (Actually I am American, just not from USA. I still do not understand why that country named itself with the name of the continent. It is as if Italy renamed themselves Europe.)
and these TV stations tried to refuse to carry "pro-chavez" statements, like a speech in which he announces he hasn't resigned? If anything should get your broadcast license pulled, that would be it.
There was no such video. It is true that they did not broadcast the events that lead to the restitution of Chavez.
The guy doesn't *have* to be a saint. he is not.
He can be a right bastard,
He is.
supporting a military coup against him is still a crime
- there are no serious questions about the legitimacy of his election or re-election. There are serious questions about the legitimacy of the 2004 referendum organized by the now vicepresident. The fact that carter (who is on chavez payroll) found no evidence of fraud mean nothing. There are also no evidence that there was no fraud. The vote was with electronic machines and, while the machines had a paper trace, it was forbidden to count the papers. Anyway, there were towns with more voters than inhabitants, but that is besides the point. Even if elections were fair, violating the rights of citizens is not democratic. His government uses a blacklist to prevent (or fire) people who signed a petition for the referendum from working at most state owned companies or agencies. I can send you a copy of the program they use. It is called Maisanta (I have the 1.1 version, but there is a 2.0 version too).
The problem with many of you is that you believe that winning elections is a license to do whatever you want. Many dictators have been popular and some have even been elected (Hitler was one of those).
Well, CNN nad NBC are bad examples. During 2002 military coup RCTV reported that Chavez "denounced" his presidency when in fact he didn't. Imagine that a rogue military group took over White House and CNN claimed that president resigned when in fact he didn't. That's pretty much what happened in Venezuela.
RCTV didn't report anything. They just broadcasted Chavez's highest ranking general in chief sayng chavez had resigned. Here's the video
You mean, didn't renew the license of the station that assisted in the coup of April 2002.
Why did he renew the license of Venevisión, which has repeatedly been acused by Chavez of also "assisting" in the coup of 2002? Where are solid proofs of their participation in the coup? Did they participate in a coup because they showed the opposition people being shot while chavez was trying to prevent that by chaining all the stations in a public address at the same time? or because they showed the pro-Chavez highest ranking general-in-chief saying that Chavez had resigned? Nobody has produced solid proof that any of the TV stations (both RCTV or the others that are now pro-Chavez) participated in putting Carmona in power and its decree eliminating all established powers. Just because Chavez says so does not mean it is true.
By the way, how is not renewing the license to broadcast over the air not shutting down an over-the-air channel? It is like saying that not renewing Slashdot its permission to be published on the Internet, and seizing their servers is not shutting them down. They could publish in a private network, or by paper... sure
Perhaps it needs a P2P-based hosting system to serve up its content. Here is a product that apparently provides some kind of P2P-Wiki Here is an academic proposal for hosting wikipedia over a P2P network. And here is someone else working on the same problem.
I believe Sun intentionally obfuscates the issue by pointing out that native code is not portable, is somewhat more fragile (because it is not insulated from system dependencies by a VM) and does not necessarily perform better than bytecode in a VM with an aggressive JIT. All these are true, but is besides the point.?
So, by your logic, is the JVM somewhat more fragile because it is written in native code? So one way of making the JVM less fragile and probably faster is making it run on top of another VM? But, what about this other VM?
>Major individual countries have already peaked (America, Norway, Venezuela, UK, Indonesia etc.).
I don't know about other countries, but Venezuela is far from having peaked. Venezuela, with appropriate investing has the potential to produce 6 million barrels/day compared to the 3 it is producing today. In fact, the previous plan of the Venezuelan industry was to produce 6 MBPD in 2006. Venezuela does not produce more because when the current government took power it thought it was better not to produce more in order to keep oil prices high. This policy is now changing, but the Venezuelan oil industry is now managed by politicians and not technicians, so it remains to be seen if they can raise the productioin dramatically. But believe me, Venezuela is far from having peaked and this is not considering the huge extrea heavy oil reserves.
Yes, but the people was forbidden to count them. Electronic voting machines in general only serve to increase the probability of fraud. The counting of votes must be done publicly using a system that can be verified by everyone. A computer that counts the votes simply cannot do that.
Re:Where are the differences?
on
Debian GNU/Solaris
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Uhh, linux is a kernel, and nothing more.
According to W. Richard Stevens in Unix Network Programming: "The kernel is the operating system".
if you want to release your code under BSD/MIT or another OSS license you cannot
AFAIK, there is another license (Q Public license), which is compatible with BSD style licenses. So basically, if your application is open source/free chances are your license will be compatible with either the GPL or the QPL.
Your reasoning is wrong, actually. Just because 1/9 > 10% doesn't mean that "more than 10%" (which is all the article says).
My reasoning is correct. I only said the poster's reasoning was wrong. I never said the article was right. The poster claimed 1/9 is wrong because it is not equal to 10%. The article might be wrong, but not for the reason the poster stated.
During the first trimester, a fetus is obviously not a person
Obivously to whom?... I saw an ecogram of a pregnant woman with 2 months pregnancy and the fetus' heart beat like a adult's. It is very difficult for me not to beleive it is a live human creature and that aborting it is not killing someone....
Just because it is not fully developed doesn't mean it is not a person. Babies aren't fully developed either....
Blah, blah, blah. I can not count how many times I have heard that sort of rhetoric. Especially from people with some favorite obscure language to promote. I am actually a memeber of two industry committee defining a couple specialized languages. Those organizations are filled with people like that.
I do not have any obscure language to promote. Java was the language I used to promote, but now I can't. Maybe I have to look for an obscure language to promote.....
There is NO inconsistency. You can write a Java program and it will work exactly as described. With new improvements, writing such a program became easier and more practical. Let me see, you say there is NO inconsistency, but: -A List can contain things that are not Strings. -The reflection mechanism cannot let you create objects of any type (as it did in the past). For example, you cannot reflectively create a List. -The Collections framework in the standard library is not implemented internally using generics because they know generics are crippled.
Your definition of consistency is very different from mine.
That ALL that matters. You say there is no inconsistency, but you fail to provide any specific technical argument to prove it. Instead you resort to rehoric and even say that I, who provided very specific examples of the inconsistency, am the one using rethoric. You even say that I am trying to promote obscure languages.
In fact they do make it a better designed language as opposed to what was in 1.4, what you so ignorantly stated.
java 2 5 1.5 It is not a better designed language. It IS a badly designed language.
Of cause they are not perfect. All imporvements had to be compatible with zillions of existing applications.
They could have made right and at the same time compatible. Besides, java 2 5 1.5 is not even binary compatible with old versions. If you compile with 1.5 it will not run under 1.4, so compatibility was not really a valid reason. In fact, being able to run old code has never been completely compatible. For example, most pure Java application servers designed for 1.3 did not run in 1.4 and the same happens from 1.4 to 5/1.5.
So stop saying the reason for the bad design was backwards compatibility, because if it was, then it is worse than I thought.
The fact is - they made it for a better and easier to use language. If you think that knowing about a few caveats makes you an expert - it just makes you arrogant. It is neither better nor easier to use. It is not even good. And the problems are not a few caveats. The new language is fundamentally flawed. It is totally inconsistent.
For example, Java used to be a reflective language. Now it is not. You can have a List variable, but you are unable to dynamically build a variable of that type using reflection. This is bad design. You have la List and you would think it can only contain Strings, but NO, it can contain anything (except primitives). What kind of language supports generic programming without type safety? They could have designed an excellent support for the generics, but after having designed a broken implementation that didn't support primitives (which comprise a large portion of the things you want to include in a collection), they added another broken feature to provide the illusion of support for primitive types. As a result you can have additional errors like i>=2 true, i It is not about perfection. It is about making some well designed improvements upon one of the most widely used languages. It is about practicality, not theoretical goodness. Java has never been a perfect language, but it was a GOOD language. The "improvements" are not well designed, as you say. They are badly designed. And the supposed practical value of those "improvments" is very debatable. I, particularly, see many more disadvantages than advantages.
Slashdot Mirror
And who cares about that TV station.
According to polls, between 70% and 90% of Venezuelans.
IIRC, they are the ones that used to renfer to Chavez as "the nigger" on air. If a US TV station using the public airwaves said that about Jesse Jackson, it would be pulled in short order.,
This shows how ignorant you are. "Nigger" is a insult that does not exist in Venezuela.
Calling someone a "Negro" in Venezuela is not a insult. If anything, it is an expresion of affection of admiration. It is so common, that one of the proposals of the opposition candidate in the last elections was a debit card called "Mi Negra" (my black -female-, or my "nigger" in your language). Racism is not an issue in Venezuela.
The Chavez government knows how racism is still an issue in developed countrie,and, among other things, tries to present the opposition as a white racist minority, as if we were in the colony 300 years ago.
The fact that your country has been unable to solve the racism problem makes you believe that it is still a problem in our country. It is not.
They have even been inventing terms such as "afro-descendants", as if most dark skinned Venezuelans weren't of as mixed origin as most of the rest of the population.
Yes. He only had TV cameras pointed at him.
Afterwards, the General said he said so to avoid a bloodshed.
No one really understands this explanation.
Whatever Chavez has done, he has not yet refused to hold elections and he has been elected numerous times now in elections that have been certified by observers as legitimate. So the opposition should just suck it up.
SO we should let our rights be violated just because he had the majority?
And what kind of analysis is that?
You decide that a video is right because it was made by foreigners (who were biased BTW) and sanctioned by (clueless) international distributors, and the debunkings are wrong because they were made by the opposition, without even looking at the content.
Your famous unbiased video does not even show the most crucial moment of April 11: when Chavez's highest ranking military officer announced that Chavez had resigned (see http://youtube.com/watch?v=DQ14XCNMY7k). So, I don't care if RTE is biased or clueless, but their video is misleading.
A lot of people here believe that it was RCTV who announced Chavez resignation in April 11 and not Chavez's highest-ranking military officer simply because what they know about those events is the version shown in "The Revolution will not be televised", which is nothing but propaganda.
With the closing of independent media now I understand why they say it will not be televised.
Castro isn't a tyrant.
He has more than 40 years in power, has never been elected in free elections, killed thousands to seize power and imprisons disenters. How is that not a tyrant?
Things would be great in that country if not for the stupid american embargo.
Things would be great if that country were a democracy were education and hard work facilitated social mobility.
They keep saying they are a world power in medicine and technology. If they are as great as their supporters say, they would not need to deal with the empire.
In fact, if communism is so great how come its poverty is blamed on them being unable to do business with a capitalist country?
BTW, they do business with other capitalist countries.
The business is basically that a foreign company operates and pays the government for the labor provided by Cubans and take big profits. Basically, a new form of slavery.
Forgive me for thinking the "diguise" of universal healthcare was a good idea. Its clearly a communist plot instated by a greedy power mad tyrant.
Universal health care can exist in free and non-free countries.
Do you americans ever read history books not written by americans? I mean seriously. The "Cuba is teh evil" line is so fucking 30 years ago, and it wasnt even true then!
I am not American and I have never read an American history book. (Actually I am American, just not from USA. I still do not understand why that country named itself with the name of the continent. It is as if Italy renamed themselves Europe.)
As for the rest of it, it's irrelevant or just proves my point - there was a military coup, it was claimed he resigned,
e d&search=
m ero
They did not claim he resigned. It was Chavez's highest ranking military officer who said in a news conference that Chavez resigned. Here's the video:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=DQ14XCNMY7k&mode=relat
This general is still pro-Chavez and I believe he is now the ambassador in some country.
See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucas_Rinc%C3%B3n_Ro
and these TV stations tried to refuse to carry "pro-chavez" statements, like a speech in which he announces he hasn't resigned? If anything should get your broadcast license pulled, that would be it.
There was no such video. It is true that they did not broadcast the events that lead to the restitution of Chavez.
The guy doesn't *have* to be a saint.
he is not.
He can be a right bastard,
He is.
supporting a military coup against him is still a crime
- there are no serious questions about the legitimacy of his election or re-election.
There are serious questions about the legitimacy of the 2004 referendum organized by the now vicepresident.
The fact that carter (who is on chavez payroll) found no evidence of fraud mean nothing. There are also no evidence that there was no fraud. The vote was with electronic machines and, while the machines had a paper trace, it was forbidden to count the papers.
Anyway, there were towns with more voters than inhabitants, but that is besides the point.
Even if elections were fair, violating the rights of citizens is not democratic.
His government uses a blacklist to prevent (or fire) people who signed a petition for the referendum from working at most state owned companies or agencies.
I can send you a copy of the program they use. It is called Maisanta (I have the 1.1 version, but there is a 2.0 version too).
The problem with many of you is that you believe that winning elections is a license to do whatever you want.
Many dictators have been popular and some have even been elected (Hitler was one of those).
Well, CNN nad NBC are bad examples. During 2002 military coup RCTV reported that Chavez "denounced" his presidency when in fact he didn't. Imagine that a rogue military group took over White House and CNN claimed that president resigned when in fact he didn't. That's pretty much what happened in Venezuela.
RCTV didn't report anything.
They just broadcasted Chavez's highest ranking general in chief sayng chavez had resigned. Here's the video
http://youtube.com/watch?v=X7FZxqTjrtw
A debunking of that propaganda video that doesn't even show Chavez's highest-ranking general stating that chavez had resigned.
4 9364089950&q=radiografia+de+una+mentira
= 3755
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-33787612
Other debunkings:
http://www.elgusanodeluz.com/www/articulos.asp?id
You mean, didn't renew the license of the station that assisted in the coup of April 2002.
Why did he renew the license of Venevisión, which has repeatedly been acused by Chavez of also "assisting" in the coup of 2002?
Where are solid proofs of their participation in the coup?
Did they participate in a coup because they showed the opposition people being shot while chavez was trying to prevent that by chaining all the stations in a public address at the same time? or because they showed the pro-Chavez highest ranking general-in-chief saying that Chavez had resigned?
Nobody has produced solid proof that any of the TV stations (both RCTV or the others that are now pro-Chavez) participated in putting Carmona in power and its decree eliminating all established powers.
Just because Chavez says so does not mean it is true.
By the way, how is not renewing the license to broadcast over the air not shutting down an over-the-air channel?
It is like saying that not renewing Slashdot its permission to be published on the Internet, and seizing their servers is not shutting them down. They could publish in a private network, or by paper... sure
Plus Venezuelian voting machines (that's bad) are Open Source (that's good). Unlike Diebold's.
Where did you get that from? They run a proprietary application on a proprietary operating system (Windows).
Perhaps it needs a P2P-based hosting system to serve up its content.
Here is a product that apparently provides some kind of P2P-Wiki
Here is an academic proposal for hosting wikipedia over a P2P network.
And here is someone else working on the same problem.
I don't know Mexioc. But in Venezuela the Nova (and it was marketed as the Nova) was pretty common many years ago.
I believe Sun intentionally obfuscates the issue by pointing out that native code is not portable, is somewhat more fragile (because it is not insulated from system dependencies by a VM) and does not necessarily perform better than bytecode in a VM with an aggressive JIT. All these are true, but is besides the point.?
So, by your logic, is the JVM somewhat more fragile because it is written in native code?
So one way of making the JVM less fragile and probably faster is making it run on top of another VM?
But, what about this other VM?
>Major individual countries have already peaked (America, Norway, Venezuela, UK, Indonesia etc.).
I don't know about other countries, but Venezuela is far from having peaked.
Venezuela, with appropriate investing has the potential to produce 6 million barrels/day compared to the 3 it is producing today. In fact, the previous plan of the Venezuelan industry was to produce 6 MBPD in 2006. Venezuela does not produce more because when the current government took power it thought it was better not to produce more in order to keep oil prices high. This policy is now changing, but the Venezuelan oil industry is now managed by politicians and not technicians, so it remains to be seen if they can raise the productioin dramatically. But believe me, Venezuela is far from having peaked and this is not considering the huge extrea heavy oil reserves.
Superman V? But there was never a Superman IV.
There was. It was so crappy, you probably thought it wasn't a superman movie.
Anyway, the new movie will be a sequel for Superman 2.
Maybe Marlon Brando will also get a part?
Believe it or not, Brando will get a part. I read in wikipedia a few days ago that they will use unused footage from Superman II.
they had paper trails for their last election.
Yes, but the people was forbidden to count them.
Electronic voting machines in general only serve to increase the probability of fraud.
The counting of votes must be done publicly using a system that can be verified by everyone.
A computer that counts the votes simply cannot do that.
Uhh, linux is a kernel, and nothing more.
According to W. Richard Stevens in Unix Network Programming: "The kernel is the operating system".
if you want to release your code under BSD/MIT or another OSS license you cannot
AFAIK, there is another license (Q Public license), which is compatible with BSD style licenses. So basically, if your application is open source/free chances are your license will be compatible with either the GPL or the QPL.
Your reasoning is wrong, actually. Just because 1/9 > 10% doesn't mean that "more than 10%" (which is all the article says).
My reasoning is correct. I only said the poster's reasoning was wrong. I never said the article was right. The poster claimed 1/9 is wrong because it is not equal to 10%. The article might be wrong, but not for the reason the poster stated.
So... 10% is 1 in 9? What the hell is going on? Is pi equal to 3 now?
It says More than 10%.
1/9 > 10%, so your reasoning is wrong.
During the first trimester, a fetus is obviously not a person
Obivously to whom?... I saw an ecogram of a pregnant woman with 2 months pregnancy and the fetus' heart beat like a adult's. It is very difficult for me not to beleive it is a live human creature and that aborting it is not killing someone....
Just because it is not fully developed doesn't mean it is not a person. Babies aren't fully developed either....
Love and monogamy is found nowhere else in nature...
Actually, it is common. Wolves, for example, are monogamous...
I forgot about the use of angle brackets. In the previous posts it should have said List instead of List
Blah, blah, blah. I can not count how many times I have heard that sort of rhetoric. Especially from people with some favorite obscure language to promote. I am actually a memeber of two industry committee defining a couple specialized languages. Those organizations are filled with people like that.
I do not have any obscure language to promote. Java was the language I used to promote, but now I can't. Maybe I have to look for an obscure language to promote.....
There is NO inconsistency. You can write a Java program and it will work exactly as described. With new improvements, writing such a program became easier and more practical.
Let me see, you say there is NO inconsistency, but:
-A List can contain things that are not Strings.
-The reflection mechanism cannot let you create objects of any type (as it did in the past). For example, you cannot reflectively create a List.
-The Collections framework in the standard library is not implemented internally using generics because they know generics are crippled.
Your definition of consistency is very different from mine.
That ALL that matters.
You say there is no inconsistency, but you fail to provide any specific technical argument to prove it. Instead you resort to rehoric and even say that I, who provided very specific examples of the inconsistency, am the one using rethoric. You even say that I am trying to promote obscure languages.
In fact they do make it a better designed language as opposed to what was in 1.4, what you so ignorantly stated.
java 2 5 1.5 It is not a better designed language.
It IS a badly designed language.
Of cause they are not perfect. All imporvements had to be compatible with zillions of existing applications.
They could have made right and at the same time compatible.
Besides, java 2 5 1.5 is not even binary compatible with old versions. If you compile with 1.5 it will not run under 1.4, so compatibility was not really a valid reason.
In fact, being able to run old code has never been completely compatible. For example, most pure Java application servers designed for 1.3 did not run in 1.4 and the same happens from 1.4 to 5/1.5.
So stop saying the reason for the bad design was backwards compatibility, because if it was, then it is worse than I thought.
The fact is - they made it for a better and easier to use language. If you think that knowing about a few caveats makes you an expert - it just makes you arrogant.
It is neither better nor easier to use. It is not even good. And the problems are not a few caveats.
The new language is fundamentally flawed. It is totally inconsistent.
For example, Java used to be a reflective language. Now it is not. You can have a List variable, but you are unable to dynamically build a variable of that type using reflection. This is bad design.
You have la List and you would think it can only contain Strings, but NO, it can contain anything (except primitives).
What kind of language supports generic programming without type safety?
They could have designed an excellent support for the generics, but after having designed a broken implementation that didn't support primitives (which comprise a large portion of the things you want to include in a collection), they added another broken feature to provide the illusion of support for primitive types. As a result you can have additional errors like i>=2 true, i
It is not about perfection. It is about making some well designed improvements upon one of the most widely used languages. It is about practicality, not theoretical goodness.
Java has never been a perfect language, but it was a GOOD language. The "improvements" are not well designed, as you say. They are badly designed.
And the supposed practical value of those "improvments" is very debatable. I, particularly, see many more disadvantages than advantages.