I find this "your a douche" thing to be very comical. A few years ago when the economy was good, if he would have quit for this reason everyone on Slashdot would have called him a hero for taking a stand against 'the man' (i.e. MS shops in general). Yeah brother, open source or die. Now the economy sucks and maybe the shops using OSS are thinning out which would make sense, since most/many shops using OSS are startups (where he should be looking). And if investment dollars are less, so will the start ups be (except in say the BRIC countries). But anyway, now that people are forced to see reality... NOW the folks on Slashdot are speaking with perspective (and talking as if they have all along. Regardless... yeah, he's a douche. If he was going to quit for this reason he should have had another job lined up.
Search using Yahoo. Or Bing. Hell, Microsoft is starting to look a lot less evil than Google. Nothing forcing anyone to use Google. So I says fuck 'em. Can't believe I now wish I'd bought an iPhone instead of an android. Next time. Anyway, if people really want to send Google a message, stop using them. Maybe a mass one day general boycott, like on February 15 to protest. Everyone use yahoo or Bing on that day. Just an idea. Spread da word if you think it worth it.
What a load of crap. Do you really believe that? First, Britain would in no way have dropped a nuclear bomb on Buenos Aires. Especially not for a relatively minor territorial dispute. Britain would have become a pariah of epic proportions. Even a hard ass like Thatcher (who I liked in a cringing way) knew that it would have sunk the country economically for years, hurting it far worse than even losing the Falklands would have. There isn't anything Britain contributes that much that would make countries keep wanting to deal with it if it had dropped an unnecessary nuclear warhead on a major metropolitan city that had not done anything even remotely worth that kind of response. If Thatcher would have done that, Iran would have looked Disneyland in comparison; and the ayatollah would have looked like Mr. Rogers compared to her. England would have fucked itself in the arse like a carnal oroborus with that move. No fucking way. For abso-fucking-lutely sure that was a load of crap put out there so Mitterrand could say it wasn't his fault.
You know if Britain would have done that they would just know that they would be ostracized internationally. Meanwhile the rest of the world would have flocked to Argentina's defence. Argentina would have got so much aid that not only would they likely have become a serious powerhouse, they would like have ended up with the Falklands in the end because of it.
And for another thing, of course France would give up the codes. Argentina was fighting a huge ally of France. France and Britain are only 30 miles apart and are HUGE trading partners. If Argentina went to war with Chile, I sincerely doubt if France would ever give up the codes even if one side threatened to drop a nuclear bomb. But Chile isn't that close an ally as the U.K. is. Seriously anyone who thinks they wouldn't give up the codes just for that is a complete idiot.
Rule number two in the chapter on logistics when going to war in the modern era: Don't buy your high tech gear from someone who is better friends with your enemy than they are with you (and especially not if your supplier is BFFs with your new enemy... for Christ's sake, even school yard kids can figure that one out). Of course rule number one is don't buy anything from the guys you are about to go to war with. The corollary to this last one that America should remember is don't offshore all your parts manufacturing to countries that could be a potential enemy... especially not if they have started flexing their muscles lately. That goes even if the greedy manufacturers actually believe that their 'secret' technology is actually secret when made in another country. And I would bet cash money they know they can keep no technology secrets from the foreign countries' governments in their offshore factories and contract manufacturers, but won't admit to the politicians so that the politicians can maintain 'plausible deniability'. The key word there is plausible. Claims on succumbing to threats of nuclear disaster on a country you don't care much about isn't plausible. Especially not when the long term damage done to the perpetrator would be just a harsh or worse (actual casualties not withstanding).
There are so many reasons that this is bullshit. Try and remember that even if it shows up in a newspaper that it doesn't mean it is true. Governments all over the world use propaganda; even [Fill In Name Of Your Country].
Some might say it is because that it takes so long to become a practising lawyer that they become trapped in the ivory tower and don't relate to real people any more. Me, I'm inclined to believe it is that plus the fact that by over-complicating law they have found job security and higher wages. This leads lawyers to pursue legalities instead of justice (which is a form of ethics). This case is a great example. It is probably legal for them to represent both sides. It certainly is not ethical or just. It is also why society gets punished when police make an illegal search, and not the police who make the illegal search. A smoking gun is a smoking gun and it shouldn't matter how you find it. But to ensure it is found legally they should throw cops in jail for a significant time if they break the law to find it. Instead they put murderers back out on the street and the two sides that broke the law (the murderer and the cops who did the illegal search) get off scot-free while society suffers. That is legality versus justice in the criminal system.
Good point. But this was also the thinking when they removed the guns when on the initial F-4s. Then they had to add them back quickly when reality bit them in the ass in Vietnam. I think this works if you are going up against less effect planes (and even though the Iraqis had a few good planes they weren't as numerous nor did they have the advanced technology that the Russians outfit them with). I would bet that against.equal tech with effective electronic warfare suites, jamming etc. that dogfight capabilities will factor in again. Then the platform will lose to the sports car. Same idea with all the foolish weapons that rely on GPS. You know the first things to be shot down will be the satellites in any really serious conflict where the technology matters. But then again America has outsourced all it electronic subcomponents to China (Russian ally), India and elsewhere. So even the devices made in America are really foreign made. Who know what logic has been built in. Likely if they ever had to get into a dogfight with any of them, the other pilot will just flip a switch and shut of the American plane's engines!
Canada is currently in the process of adding new ships to its navy via the 'Single Class Surface Combatant Project', and is modernizing its fleet of Halifax class frigates. Because America's International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) is a pain in the ass and frequently abused for political purposes, one of the big mandates at least for the Halifax frigate modernization is to try to reduce the dependence on U.S. (weapons) systems as much as possible; opting for systems from Canada, Sweden, Germany, the Netherlands and Israel. IIRC I believe this started with issues around exporting and/or updating torpedoes (or at least that is what I remember being the straw that broke the camel's back in terms of naval weapons systems). It is unclear if this will continue with the new combat ships; there has been no clear indication published (pdf) in the news one way or another. Now if a close ally of the United States is forced to look elsewhere to avoid a lot of issues raised by the abuse of ITAR rules by American politicians and companies, then it is likely a very smart decision of India to avoid buying from the U.S.
But I don't know why they didn't go with the Typhoon. It looks marginally better. The wing load is higher, the thrust, speed, and climb is better, and it super cruises faster. These kinds of things are what allows a plane to return home at the end of the day when the shit hits the fan. Mind you, the Americans did do a bit of a study in the 80s I believe, where they had a bunch of top guns in F-5s go after standard operational F-14s and F-15s and pretty much proved that a bunch of small manoeuvrable fighters were a credible and significant threat to the bigger less manoeuvrable modern planes. Not sure where they went with that after. Maybe the military industrial complex that Eisenhower warned about took issue with the results of that study.
even better, I wish slashdot and their CSS brainfuck trust would implement the functionality of the defunct slashdotter firefox plug in that allowed you to solectively collapse threads/branches and not with that slider based on mod points. Just collapse an entire thread you see is going someplace you don't care about so that you can actually read stuff that interests you.
Is that kind of like it's ironic that dozens and dozens of comments into this post people are still talking about some pedantic asses complaint about the use of the word ironic instead of discussing the ideas in the fucking article? Yeah yeah, I know... welcome to slashdot. [sigh] sometimes I just wish the first one or two comments would be on topic or at least a branch that came from something that was on topic.
This mode of business is how the mattress industry has worked for years. Ever wonder why they can continually advertise they won't be undersold. It is because each chain has their own versions with their own parts numbers. You can't find the same mattress at another companies stores. Well you can. They will be identical in all respects except a stitch or something equally minor, and of course the model name and number. And people are dumb enough that it works at least 70 or 80% of the time. So there is precedent for this to work as well.
Well except for the people driven to ruin and suicide by McCarthy. Or the giant Klan rallies in the 1930s when it was fashionable in many places to belong to that organization. Or now-a-days with the secret police practices of secret arrests and other actions against the constitution. From any one of those points it is not very far from extremism. American has gravitated very close to the motherland/fatherland mentality of countries like 30s Germany and Soviet Russia. Not everywhere in the U.S.A. but in a lot of places. Just look at what happened when the Dixie Chicks exercised their right to free speech and slagged Bush for invading Iraq. They got all sorts of death threats and had contracts cancelled and CDs burned etc. People going apeshit without any thought. And the more inured the people get to secret police and 'homeland' security (fuck that even sounds like a phrase from Nazi Germany.... vee muzt protekt za homeland!) the further down that slope you slide. Arizona has come really close to the whole 'papers please' gestapo bullshit. If this keeps going it will eventually happen and once there, it will be everywhere. The leaders there should really protect the constitution. Part of the reason for the revolution was to get away from being ruled by a king and arbitrary decrees and laws. It wasn't all about taxes like the right wing freaks want you to think (but then again it is the right wing freaks... well them and Obama... who advocate for arbitrary laws and decrees and secret courts and police). So now what do we have. Bush and Obama claiming executive privilege (kind of like the king saying we don't have to tell the people we rule anything). And the government passing laws saying the army can arrest anyone anywhere, even in America. You guys had enough laws to catch the 9/11 terrorists, it was inter agency head up the ass-ness that is why they never caught them. None wanted to share info. If they had put out bulletins to pick these guys up instead of each one looking on their own they would have stopped them. Fuck there are records one of the guys was stopped on a traffic infraction days before. If the cops had known that the FBI, or CIA or whoever wanted to question them, he could have arrested the guy on spot, or at least brought him in for questioning. None of this bullshit is necessary. Existing laws (i.e. laws that existed in 2000) were good enough. It is how the laws were used that needed to be improved. But now momentum towards terminal stupidity is almost unstoppable now. Next they'll be arresting kids on terrorism charges when they overhear them playing soldiers.
You're an idiot. I said you don't understand because you choose not to understand. But now I obviously have to take it back. You didn't understand because you're an idiot.
It's a pain in the but to write code for two different operating systems that have their own look and feel. Duh! And I suppose the guy who wrote TFA thinks he's a boy genius for figuring this one out. And what is this fucking Einstein going to hit us with tomorrow? Newsflash: The Sky Is Blue! Must be a slow news day. Oh, and send the boy genius back to journalism school till he figures out what 'news' is.
In my experience when people don't understand something it usually for one of two main reasons: The first is that they can't understand it: either they aren't smart enough or don't have enough information, knowledge, or experience. Maybe the last two apply to you but I think not. The second main reason people don't understand is because they don't want to: People can be stubborn and bull headed and even though they are capable, for whatever reason they choose not to understand and be argumentative. By pretending (I sure hope it is pretending because otherwise you fall into the first category) that you don't understand that most people in different continents separated by many timezones are active at different times of the day in terms of GMT... well it make me believe that you are falling into the latter category. That is, you don't want to understand what I am talking about. In that case it is pointless to continue 'talking'. Good luck with that.
But isn't the effect going to be the same? If so, wouldn't they just be wasting energy coding something more complex to achieve the same outcome? Unless you have an idea for a different result that affects the moderator as well as the mod points for the post perhaps? Like if a moderators mods get changed too often they lose karma?
Maybe you haven't. But I have made posts late at night in North America that have been modded down and commented on (sometimes negatively) during the European day where the comments were from a European viewpoint where they obviously didn't get where I was coming from. Then later in my morning the posts would be modded up and comments where people understood what I was saying were made. Like I said it is often due to not understanding colloquialisms or expressions, but sometimes not understanding local/N.A. perceptions and attitudes. You should be able to see that I am not the only one who has experienced this by the amount I was modded up during North American hours. It may not have been a politically correct thing to say (I.e. some people will get overly sensitive about it even though it is just speaking the truth) but it really happens. Not everyone on every country 'gets' every other nationalities' manner of speech. I am sure that I have been guilty of it too. So as they say in North America, don't get your panties in a bunch, sunshine.;)
I don't meta moderate any more because they made it a pain in the ass to see the comments in context. How can I tell if a comment is fare if I can't see what the comment is replying to? Is it on topic? I don't know, I can't see what people are talking about to see. Was it insightful. I don't know... a comment about cats could be insightful but maybe not if they're talking about dogs. (I avoided a car metaphor there.) If you can't easily see the preceding comments then it is pointless to meta moderate. And the last time I tried it about a month ago, I just remember having to jump through hoops to find the parent so that I could understand the post. And sending Slash dot a suggestion or complaint doesn't get you anywhere. So fuckit, I don't bother.
Yeah, they were rude and a lot of modded down comments are, but I was responding to my post's parent who said he didn't understand why some people set their filter at -1 and read everything. And my response was that sometimes things modded down by others might not have been by me and might still be interesting. But yeah, the risk is reading crap as well.
Oh yeah, and there are moderators who mark something down because they don't like the point someone is making even if it is on topic (or at least on the topic of that branch of the thread).
Sometimes comments that are insightful to some get modded down by 'politically correct' moderators who don't understand the truth is still the truth even if it might hurt someone's feelings. And then others get modded down because moderators in other countries have a language/translation issue and don't understand the point someone is making and thinks they are being rude, or they don't get a joke. These ones I usually attribute to not understanding local colloquialisms. And sometimes a combination of both. I am sure there are other reasons legitimate posts get marked down, but those are two that come to mind. And true, a lot of those mods get corrected, but not always.
The definition of 'popular' in the dictionary doesn't mention anything about 'most used'. It is pretty much all about 'most liked'. And if you noticed right from the start, the TIOBE site and I Programmer don't use the word 'popular' in context with 'the index'. They use the term 'market share'. So even though it would be redundant (since it is mentioned in the first paragraph on the TIOBE index page) maybe this branch of the thread should have started:
'Objective C only has an increasing market share because iOS requires it. It's like reporting...'
Then the child posts are moot. Unless you want to be redundant and say that Objective-C isn't necessarily popular, it is only increasing in market share because iOS based devices are popular. If you want to find out what's popular you have to survey the developers and ask them why they are using a language, not just what language they are using. There are lot of times something or someone that is popular isn't used because it isn't suitable for the job. And that is probably why the term 'market share' is used in TFA's, and not 'popularity'.
Even I can't figure out my last sentence... here it is again: it is a matter of treating people who don't deserve it inhumanely that sets you on the road to being a genocidal madman.
Slashdot Mirror
I find this "your a douche" thing to be very comical. A few years ago when the economy was good, if he would have quit for this reason everyone on Slashdot would have called him a hero for taking a stand against 'the man' (i.e. MS shops in general). Yeah brother, open source or die. Now the economy sucks and maybe the shops using OSS are thinning out which would make sense, since most/many shops using OSS are startups (where he should be looking). And if investment dollars are less, so will the start ups be (except in say the BRIC countries). But anyway, now that people are forced to see reality... NOW the folks on Slashdot are speaking with perspective (and talking as if they have all along. Regardless... yeah, he's a douche. If he was going to quit for this reason he should have had another job lined up.
Search using Yahoo. Or Bing. Hell, Microsoft is starting to look a lot less evil than Google. Nothing forcing anyone to use Google. So I says fuck 'em. Can't believe I now wish I'd bought an iPhone instead of an android. Next time. Anyway, if people really want to send Google a message, stop using them. Maybe a mass one day general boycott, like on February 15 to protest. Everyone use yahoo or Bing on that day. Just an idea. Spread da word if you think it worth it.
If any of the scientists were around in the Soviet era, then I'm expecting the lake to be polluted with nuclear waste within two weeks.
What a load of crap. Do you really believe that? First, Britain would in no way have dropped a nuclear bomb on Buenos Aires. Especially not for a relatively minor territorial dispute. Britain would have become a pariah of epic proportions. Even a hard ass like Thatcher (who I liked in a cringing way) knew that it would have sunk the country economically for years, hurting it far worse than even losing the Falklands would have. There isn't anything Britain contributes that much that would make countries keep wanting to deal with it if it had dropped an unnecessary nuclear warhead on a major metropolitan city that had not done anything even remotely worth that kind of response. If Thatcher would have done that, Iran would have looked Disneyland in comparison; and the ayatollah would have looked like Mr. Rogers compared to her. England would have fucked itself in the arse like a carnal oroborus with that move. No fucking way. For abso-fucking-lutely sure that was a load of crap put out there so Mitterrand could say it wasn't his fault.
You know if Britain would have done that they would just know that they would be ostracized internationally. Meanwhile the rest of the world would have flocked to Argentina's defence. Argentina would have got so much aid that not only would they likely have become a serious powerhouse, they would like have ended up with the Falklands in the end because of it.
And for another thing, of course France would give up the codes. Argentina was fighting a huge ally of France. France and Britain are only 30 miles apart and are HUGE trading partners. If Argentina went to war with Chile, I sincerely doubt if France would ever give up the codes even if one side threatened to drop a nuclear bomb. But Chile isn't that close an ally as the U.K. is. Seriously anyone who thinks they wouldn't give up the codes just for that is a complete idiot.
Rule number two in the chapter on logistics when going to war in the modern era: Don't buy your high tech gear from someone who is better friends with your enemy than they are with you (and especially not if your supplier is BFFs with your new enemy... for Christ's sake, even school yard kids can figure that one out). Of course rule number one is don't buy anything from the guys you are about to go to war with. The corollary to this last one that America should remember is don't offshore all your parts manufacturing to countries that could be a potential enemy... especially not if they have started flexing their muscles lately. That goes even if the greedy manufacturers actually believe that their 'secret' technology is actually secret when made in another country. And I would bet cash money they know they can keep no technology secrets from the foreign countries' governments in their offshore factories and contract manufacturers, but won't admit to the politicians so that the politicians can maintain 'plausible deniability'. The key word there is plausible. Claims on succumbing to threats of nuclear disaster on a country you don't care much about isn't plausible. Especially not when the long term damage done to the perpetrator would be just a harsh or worse (actual casualties not withstanding).
There are so many reasons that this is bullshit. Try and remember that even if it shows up in a newspaper that it doesn't mean it is true. Governments all over the world use propaganda; even [Fill In Name Of Your Country].
Some might say it is because that it takes so long to become a practising lawyer that they become trapped in the ivory tower and don't relate to real people any more. Me, I'm inclined to believe it is that plus the fact that by over-complicating law they have found job security and higher wages. This leads lawyers to pursue legalities instead of justice (which is a form of ethics). This case is a great example. It is probably legal for them to represent both sides. It certainly is not ethical or just. It is also why society gets punished when police make an illegal search, and not the police who make the illegal search. A smoking gun is a smoking gun and it shouldn't matter how you find it. But to ensure it is found legally they should throw cops in jail for a significant time if they break the law to find it. Instead they put murderers back out on the street and the two sides that broke the law (the murderer and the cops who did the illegal search) get off scot-free while society suffers. That is legality versus justice in the criminal system.
Good point. But this was also the thinking when they removed the guns when on the initial F-4s. Then they had to add them back quickly when reality bit them in the ass in Vietnam. I think this works if you are going up against less effect planes (and even though the Iraqis had a few good planes they weren't as numerous nor did they have the advanced technology that the Russians outfit them with). I would bet that against.equal tech with effective electronic warfare suites, jamming etc. that dogfight capabilities will factor in again. Then the platform will lose to the sports car. Same idea with all the foolish weapons that rely on GPS. You know the first things to be shot down will be the satellites in any really serious conflict where the technology matters. But then again America has outsourced all it electronic subcomponents to China (Russian ally), India and elsewhere. So even the devices made in America are really foreign made. Who know what logic has been built in. Likely if they ever had to get into a dogfight with any of them, the other pilot will just flip a switch and shut of the American plane's engines!
Canada is currently in the process of adding new ships to its navy via the 'Single Class Surface Combatant Project', and is modernizing its fleet of Halifax class frigates. Because America's International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) is a pain in the ass and frequently abused for political purposes, one of the big mandates at least for the Halifax frigate modernization is to try to reduce the dependence on U.S. (weapons) systems as much as possible; opting for systems from Canada, Sweden, Germany, the Netherlands and Israel. IIRC I believe this started with issues around exporting and/or updating torpedoes (or at least that is what I remember being the straw that broke the camel's back in terms of naval weapons systems). It is unclear if this will continue with the new combat ships; there has been no clear indication published (pdf) in the news one way or another. Now if a close ally of the United States is forced to look elsewhere to avoid a lot of issues raised by the abuse of ITAR rules by American politicians and companies, then it is likely a very smart decision of India to avoid buying from the U.S.
But I don't know why they didn't go with the Typhoon. It looks marginally better. The wing load is higher, the thrust, speed, and climb is better, and it super cruises faster. These kinds of things are what allows a plane to return home at the end of the day when the shit hits the fan. Mind you, the Americans did do a bit of a study in the 80s I believe, where they had a bunch of top guns in F-5s go after standard operational F-14s and F-15s and pretty much proved that a bunch of small manoeuvrable fighters were a credible and significant threat to the bigger less manoeuvrable modern planes. Not sure where they went with that after. Maybe the military industrial complex that Eisenhower warned about took issue with the results of that study.
FTFY
agile workplace which, frankly, is the current silver bullet
even better, I wish slashdot and their CSS brainfuck trust would implement the functionality of the defunct slashdotter firefox plug in that allowed you to solectively collapse threads/branches and not with that slider based on mod points. Just collapse an entire thread you see is going someplace you don't care about so that you can actually read stuff that interests you.
Is that kind of like it's ironic that dozens and dozens of comments into this post people are still talking about some pedantic asses complaint about the use of the word ironic instead of discussing the ideas in the fucking article? Yeah yeah, I know... welcome to slashdot. [sigh] sometimes I just wish the first one or two comments would be on topic or at least a branch that came from something that was on topic.
This mode of business is how the mattress industry has worked for years. Ever wonder why they can continually advertise they won't be undersold. It is because each chain has their own versions with their own parts numbers. You can't find the same mattress at another companies stores. Well you can. They will be identical in all respects except a stitch or something equally minor, and of course the model name and number. And people are dumb enough that it works at least 70 or 80% of the time. So there is precedent for this to work as well.
Well except for the people driven to ruin and suicide by McCarthy. Or the giant Klan rallies in the 1930s when it was fashionable in many places to belong to that organization. Or now-a-days with the secret police practices of secret arrests and other actions against the constitution. From any one of those points it is not very far from extremism. American has gravitated very close to the motherland/fatherland mentality of countries like 30s Germany and Soviet Russia. Not everywhere in the U.S.A. but in a lot of places. Just look at what happened when the Dixie Chicks exercised their right to free speech and slagged Bush for invading Iraq. They got all sorts of death threats and had contracts cancelled and CDs burned etc. People going apeshit without any thought. And the more inured the people get to secret police and 'homeland' security (fuck that even sounds like a phrase from Nazi Germany.... vee muzt protekt za homeland!) the further down that slope you slide. Arizona has come really close to the whole 'papers please' gestapo bullshit. If this keeps going it will eventually happen and once there, it will be everywhere. The leaders there should really protect the constitution. Part of the reason for the revolution was to get away from being ruled by a king and arbitrary decrees and laws. It wasn't all about taxes like the right wing freaks want you to think (but then again it is the right wing freaks... well them and Obama... who advocate for arbitrary laws and decrees and secret courts and police). So now what do we have. Bush and Obama claiming executive privilege (kind of like the king saying we don't have to tell the people we rule anything). And the government passing laws saying the army can arrest anyone anywhere, even in America. You guys had enough laws to catch the 9/11 terrorists, it was inter agency head up the ass-ness that is why they never caught them. None wanted to share info. If they had put out bulletins to pick these guys up instead of each one looking on their own they would have stopped them. Fuck there are records one of the guys was stopped on a traffic infraction days before. If the cops had known that the FBI, or CIA or whoever wanted to question them, he could have arrested the guy on spot, or at least brought him in for questioning. None of this bullshit is necessary. Existing laws (i.e. laws that existed in 2000) were good enough. It is how the laws were used that needed to be improved. But now momentum towards terminal stupidity is almost unstoppable now. Next they'll be arresting kids on terrorism charges when they overhear them playing soldiers.
You're an idiot. I said you don't understand because you choose not to understand. But now I obviously have to take it back. You didn't understand because you're an idiot.
It's a pain in the but to write code for two different operating systems that have their own look and feel. Duh! And I suppose the guy who wrote TFA thinks he's a boy genius for figuring this one out. And what is this fucking Einstein going to hit us with tomorrow? Newsflash: The Sky Is Blue! Must be a slow news day. Oh, and send the boy genius back to journalism school till he figures out what 'news' is.
In my experience when people don't understand something it usually for one of two main reasons: The first is that they can't understand it: either they aren't smart enough or don't have enough information, knowledge, or experience. Maybe the last two apply to you but I think not. The second main reason people don't understand is because they don't want to: People can be stubborn and bull headed and even though they are capable, for whatever reason they choose not to understand and be argumentative. By pretending (I sure hope it is pretending because otherwise you fall into the first category) that you don't understand that most people in different continents separated by many timezones are active at different times of the day in terms of GMT... well it make me believe that you are falling into the latter category. That is, you don't want to understand what I am talking about. In that case it is pointless to continue 'talking'. Good luck with that.
But isn't the effect going to be the same? If so, wouldn't they just be wasting energy coding something more complex to achieve the same outcome? Unless you have an idea for a different result that affects the moderator as well as the mod points for the post perhaps? Like if a moderators mods get changed too often they lose karma?
Maybe you haven't. But I have made posts late at night in North America that have been modded down and commented on (sometimes negatively) during the European day where the comments were from a European viewpoint where they obviously didn't get where I was coming from. Then later in my morning the posts would be modded up and comments where people understood what I was saying were made. Like I said it is often due to not understanding colloquialisms or expressions, but sometimes not understanding local/N.A. perceptions and attitudes. You should be able to see that I am not the only one who has experienced this by the amount I was modded up during North American hours. It may not have been a politically correct thing to say (I.e. some people will get overly sensitive about it even though it is just speaking the truth) but it really happens. Not everyone on every country 'gets' every other nationalities' manner of speech. I am sure that I have been guilty of it too. So as they say in North America, don't get your panties in a bunch, sunshine. ;)
I don't meta moderate any more because they made it a pain in the ass to see the comments in context. How can I tell if a comment is fare if I can't see what the comment is replying to? Is it on topic? I don't know, I can't see what people are talking about to see. Was it insightful. I don't know... a comment about cats could be insightful but maybe not if they're talking about dogs. (I avoided a car metaphor there.) If you can't easily see the preceding comments then it is pointless to meta moderate. And the last time I tried it about a month ago, I just remember having to jump through hoops to find the parent so that I could understand the post. And sending Slash dot a suggestion or complaint doesn't get you anywhere. So fuckit, I don't bother.
Yeah, they were rude and a lot of modded down comments are, but I was responding to my post's parent who said he didn't understand why some people set their filter at -1 and read everything. And my response was that sometimes things modded down by others might not have been by me and might still be interesting. But yeah, the risk is reading crap as well.
Oh yeah, and there are moderators who mark something down because they don't like the point someone is making even if it is on topic (or at least on the topic of that branch of the thread).
Sometimes comments that are insightful to some get modded down by 'politically correct' moderators who don't understand the truth is still the truth even if it might hurt someone's feelings. And then others get modded down because moderators in other countries have a language/translation issue and don't understand the point someone is making and thinks they are being rude, or they don't get a joke. These ones I usually attribute to not understanding local colloquialisms. And sometimes a combination of both. I am sure there are other reasons legitimate posts get marked down, but those are two that come to mind. And true, a lot of those mods get corrected, but not always.
So how did Steven Hawking take your recommendation that he should just die.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity... or of the moderator's either.
The definition of 'popular' in the dictionary doesn't mention anything about 'most used'. It is pretty much all about 'most liked'. And if you noticed right from the start, the TIOBE site and I Programmer don't use the word 'popular' in context with 'the index'. They use the term 'market share'. So even though it would be redundant (since it is mentioned in the first paragraph on the TIOBE index page) maybe this branch of the thread should have started:
'Objective C only has an increasing market share because iOS requires it. It's like reporting...'
Then the child posts are moot. Unless you want to be redundant and say that Objective-C isn't necessarily popular, it is only increasing in market share because iOS based devices are popular. If you want to find out what's popular you have to survey the developers and ask them why they are using a language, not just what language they are using. There are lot of times something or someone that is popular isn't used because it isn't suitable for the job. And that is probably why the term 'market share' is used in TFA's, and not 'popularity'.
Even I can't figure out my last sentence... here it is again: it is a matter of treating people who don't deserve it inhumanely that sets you on the road to being a genocidal madman.