The way that we handle priorities is to have everything rated relative to everything else. In practice this means that all of the stakeholders have to talk to each other and agree. If Product Management wants A, B, C, D, and the team can only get 3 done, then the first priority item gets worked on first, then second, then third.
"Open type system" in this case means "the ability to make business logic and pieces of data model part of the type system."
So if I'm writing, say, an XML parser, the pieces of it from a defined XSD can now be part of the type system. If you try to use a tag which is typed incorrectly (i.e. isn't part of the XSD) you'll get a compiler warning.
This is, in its core, a language that's really meant to be used for scripting in a limited domain enterprise context. Sure, that means it's not as "pure" and "ideological" as some languages, but it's something that's useful in the business sense.
Brin makes an argument that not only are we going in this direction, but that this direction is inherently reasonable. I'm not sure I agree with all of his claims about using "public shame" to help shape a more harmonious society, but it's still worth the read.
They do sort of have addresses, but it's by subdivision of block. As an example, a particular Hostel I was at was at "Shinjuku-ku, 5-2 Katamachi"
So to find it you need to go to the Shinjuku area of Tokyo, and then look for the Katamachi block, then find sub-block 5, and then it's the 2nd building in that section. Luckily for me the search space wasn't that large, but it's still definitely a two dimensional search rather than a one dimensional search...
The "counter-executive" used to be the Vice-President. Back in Washington's time, electors voted for two people, and the person with the second most votes was Vice-President. What this meant was that there were very real possibilities that the Vice-President was someone of the opposing political party. It's not necessarily in the best interest of the country for the Vice-President to have a vested interest in the demise of the President...
I'm class of '00 and I was one of the first people accepted with the new standards. I had no programming experience in high school, and my application and awards was much more applicable to that of a music major... except that I wasn't applying to the music school. I'm fairly certain I was admitted on the basis of my extra-curricular activities, especially since my SATs and GPA weren't outstanding.
Along with a number of other peers I struggled. It was very difficult to get "on track" with others who had had that kind of exposure before. A number of us talked to the Undergraduate Advisor and discussed what could be done to help with this, since programming experience in high school has not been a prerequisite for admittance to the program for quite some time. And so the program was shifted and adjusted. It wasn't a dumbing down, it just wasn't as gated on certain programming classes as it was before... and that change was necessary to allow people like me to succeed in this field. Computer Science is about a way of approaching a problem, a way of thinking, and not as much about the programming.
The only reason that privacy and liberty are seen as being correlated is because in our current governmental structures, there's an imbalance of privacy. But that doesn't necessarily need to exist. If nobody had privacy, and everyone had the tools to see what everyone else was doing (think internet-enabled webcams monitoring police actions) then in essence government action would be checked by the possibility of public outrage. Suppose that everyone had an equal footing: instead of the NSA wiretapping you, all phone conversations, especially all conversations by the power brokers in Washington, could be tapped and listened to by everyone.
It's a world that most people would probably not voluntarily choose to live in, but if one lived in such a world one would be forced to be more open lest one is seen as a hypocrite....at least, this is the view suggested by David Brin in his book "The Transparent Society"...
Read "The Transparent Society" by David Brin. He makes several good points about why a society needs to inevitably go in that sort of direction or end up as a tyranny of "those with privacy" versus "those without".
What you're describing is exactly how blood-feuds and racial-type hatred gets started. I play World of Warcraft too, and everyone I've ever talked to has had that same sort of problem. Back before the Honor system at some point some kid playing an Alliance character or a Horde character wanted to feel über-superior, and went and ganked some someone. And since it was so fun they decided to camp them. That level 20 Alliance guy then began to have a hatred, and a desire for revenge. When he turned to 60, he then dished it back; after all, this was what happened to him. And then the Horde victim then harbored a grudge, and so on and so forth.
Griefing is not best served with more griefing: all you're doing is training the next generation of griefers. Or quitters; the people who don't buy into that system are more likely to stop playing.
These grudges still exist, and it's just part of human nature. Think Palestine and Israel, Shiites and Sunnis, Tutsis and Hutus... the list could go on.
Well, you're right; the "historically" is somewhat of a misnomer because it's been a staging grounds for failed dynastic returns etc... and it's only current issues which have made the people on the mainland so attached.
But if we're talking rigor:P...after the Polynesians got there, the Japanese attempted a settlement, and failed. The Chinese also attempted and failed. Then it was a Dutch colony was for perhaps less than 50 years in the early 1600s, but by that point there were already ethnic Chinese on the island, which the Dutch encouraged to intermarry with the Polynesians and Dutch in order to foster racial stability. It was nominally part of China, and signed over to the Japanese at the end of the Sino-Japanese War in 1895. The Taiwanese weren't happy about this, so they declared independence, only to be run over by a significantly superior army three days later. Thus it was a Japanese colony from 1895-1945. The documents left rather vague about how Taiwan was to be handled, and this was done on purpose by the Americans in order to allow the KMT a place to run when the Chinese civil war (which had been halted for WWII) wound down and they lost.
Now, culturally speaking, Taiwan and China can be considered sufficiently different. What's interesting is that the whole idea of a unified China (the whole dynastic ideal anyway) has always been one ethnic group oppressing everyone else, whether it be the group from around Manchuria, or Mongolia, etc. There is no such thing as a unified Chinese culture... but I digress.
I think as of 1998 or so the government of Taiwan no longer considers itself the rightful ruler of the mainland. If I remember correctly there was even some rectification of the legislature to reflect the situation on the ground.
It's a pity that the moderators can't recognize flamebait when they see it.
It really depends on how you define "independence."
If by "independent" you mean the existence of a sovereign government, an army, and a legal structure, then by all means Taiwan is independent. If by "independent" you mean recognized by everyone else, then they're not.
As an example, if you try to go to Taiwan, ROC with a PROC visa, you'll be laughed at. The leaders in Taiwan are democratically elected, they have their own army, currency, health care system, business regulations, the whole works. As far as I'm concerned, that's pretty darn independent.
If you're looking at the view of whether they *should* be independent, that's where a lot of the debate comes in. In PROC the view is that historically Taiwan was part of the PROC, so it should be reunited with the motherland. This particular belief is pretty strong on the mainland due to nationalistic pride and control of the newspapers. In Taiwan, people just want the right to elect their own leaders democratically; regardless of where they stand on the reunification issue, they don't want to turn into another Hong Kong, and that is the public relations problem that PROC is faced with. They want to maintain an authoritarian government over a population that is used to publicly berating its own leaders.
Slashdot Mirror
It is creepy. All it needs is a squid head and about 7 more arms and it's something out of the Matrix.
The way that we handle priorities is to have everything rated relative to everything else. In practice this means that all of the stakeholders have to talk to each other and agree. If Product Management wants A, B, C, D, and the team can only get 3 done, then the first priority item gets worked on first, then second, then third.
"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that."
"Open type system" in this case means "the ability to make business logic and pieces of data model part of the type system."
So if I'm writing, say, an XML parser, the pieces of it from a defined XSD can now be part of the type system. If you try to use a tag which is typed incorrectly (i.e. isn't part of the XSD) you'll get a compiler warning.
This is, in its core, a language that's really meant to be used for scripting in a limited domain enterprise context. Sure, that means it's not as "pure" and "ideological" as some languages, but it's something that's useful in the business sense.
I can imagine my phone ringing and saying,
"Hey, Kevin, I just noticed you're headed to The Pub. Um, it might not be a good idea to be drinking right after that breakup. Just sayin'..."
Brin makes an argument that not only are we going in this direction, but that this direction is inherently reasonable. I'm not sure I agree with all of his claims about using "public shame" to help shape a more harmonious society, but it's still worth the read.
More about his book here.
They do sort of have addresses, but it's by subdivision of block. As an example, a particular Hostel I was at was at "Shinjuku-ku, 5-2 Katamachi"
So to find it you need to go to the Shinjuku area of Tokyo, and then look for the Katamachi block, then find sub-block 5, and then it's the 2nd building in that section. Luckily for me the search space wasn't that large, but it's still definitely a two dimensional search rather than a one dimensional search...
View Map
The "counter-executive" used to be the Vice-President. Back in Washington's time, electors voted for two people, and the person with the second most votes was Vice-President. What this meant was that there were very real possibilities that the Vice-President was someone of the opposing political party. It's not necessarily in the best interest of the country for the Vice-President to have a vested interest in the demise of the President...
That's not a delivery service, that's a comedic satire.
Some moderators here clearly have a sense of humor.
The program was not "dumbed down" ...
I'm class of '00 and I was one of the first people accepted with the new standards. I had no programming experience in high school, and my application and awards was much more applicable to that of a music major... except that I wasn't applying to the music school. I'm fairly certain I was admitted on the basis of my extra-curricular activities, especially since my SATs and GPA weren't outstanding.
Along with a number of other peers I struggled. It was very difficult to get "on track" with others who had had that kind of exposure before. A number of us talked to the Undergraduate Advisor and discussed what could be done to help with this, since programming experience in high school has not been a prerequisite for admittance to the program for quite some time. And so the program was shifted and adjusted. It wasn't a dumbing down, it just wasn't as gated on certain programming classes as it was before... and that change was necessary to allow people like me to succeed in this field. Computer Science is about a way of approaching a problem, a way of thinking, and not as much about the programming.
By the way, I happen to be male.
The only reason that privacy and liberty are seen as being correlated is because in our current governmental structures, there's an imbalance of privacy. But that doesn't necessarily need to exist. If nobody had privacy, and everyone had the tools to see what everyone else was doing (think internet-enabled webcams monitoring police actions) then in essence government action would be checked by the possibility of public outrage. Suppose that everyone had an equal footing: instead of the NSA wiretapping you, all phone conversations, especially all conversations by the power brokers in Washington, could be tapped and listened to by everyone.
...at least, this is the view suggested by David Brin in his book "The Transparent Society"...
It's a world that most people would probably not voluntarily choose to live in, but if one lived in such a world one would be forced to be more open lest one is seen as a hypocrite.
Read "The Transparent Society" by David Brin. He makes several good points about why a society needs to inevitably go in that sort of direction or end up as a tyranny of "those with privacy" versus "those without".
If everyone *reproduces*, then evolution stops. Or if there is nothing to determine whether one is more likely to reproduce, then evolution stops.
Terra is the UI you use to "reset hardware" with a brick.
Pyro is the flamethrower you use when that doesn't work nicely enough.
If it isn't funny independently, try reading it to yourself in a British accent. And if that doesn't work for you try Singaporean.
What you're describing is exactly how blood-feuds and racial-type hatred gets started. I play World of Warcraft too, and everyone I've ever talked to has had that same sort of problem. Back before the Honor system at some point some kid playing an Alliance character or a Horde character wanted to feel über-superior, and went and ganked some someone. And since it was so fun they decided to camp them. That level 20 Alliance guy then began to have a hatred, and a desire for revenge. When he turned to 60, he then dished it back; after all, this was what happened to him. And then the Horde victim then harbored a grudge, and so on and so forth.
Griefing is not best served with more griefing: all you're doing is training the next generation of griefers. Or quitters; the people who don't buy into that system are more likely to stop playing.
These grudges still exist, and it's just part of human nature. Think Palestine and Israel, Shiites and Sunnis, Tutsis and Hutus... the list could go on.
Dude, you'd have to really suck to lose to France. ...and, btw, poo, to all of you who don't have a sense of humor :P
you successfully translate the above statement to:
You spit on RIAA.
You spit on RIAA.
You spit on RIAA.
You spit on RIAA.
You spit on RIAA.
You spit on RIAA.
You spit on RIAA.
You spit on RIAA.
in orange text...
Well, you're right; the "historically" is somewhat of a misnomer because it's been a staging grounds for failed dynastic returns etc... and it's only current issues which have made the people on the mainland so attached.
:P ...after the Polynesians got there, the Japanese attempted a settlement, and failed. The Chinese also attempted and failed. Then it was a Dutch colony was for perhaps less than 50 years in the early 1600s, but by that point there were already ethnic Chinese on the island, which the Dutch encouraged to intermarry with the Polynesians and Dutch in order to foster racial stability. It was nominally part of China, and signed over to the Japanese at the end of the Sino-Japanese War in 1895. The Taiwanese weren't happy about this, so they declared independence, only to be run over by a significantly superior army three days later. Thus it was a Japanese colony from 1895-1945. The documents left rather vague about how Taiwan was to be handled, and this was done on purpose by the Americans in order to allow the KMT a place to run when the Chinese civil war (which had been halted for WWII) wound down and they lost.
But if we're talking rigor
Now, culturally speaking, Taiwan and China can be considered sufficiently different. What's interesting is that the whole idea of a unified China (the whole dynastic ideal anyway) has always been one ethnic group oppressing everyone else, whether it be the group from around Manchuria, or Mongolia, etc. There is no such thing as a unified Chinese culture... but I digress.
So unfortunately that doesn't work...
I think as of 1998 or so the government of Taiwan no longer considers itself the rightful ruler of the mainland. If I remember correctly there was even some rectification of the legislature to reflect the situation on the ground.
It's a pity that the moderators can't recognize flamebait when they see it.
It really depends on how you define "independence."
If by "independent" you mean the existence of a sovereign government, an army, and a legal structure, then by all means Taiwan is independent. If by "independent" you mean recognized by everyone else, then they're not.
As an example, if you try to go to Taiwan, ROC with a PROC visa, you'll be laughed at. The leaders in Taiwan are democratically elected, they have their own army, currency, health care system, business regulations, the whole works. As far as I'm concerned, that's pretty darn independent.
If you're looking at the view of whether they *should* be independent, that's where a lot of the debate comes in. In PROC the view is that historically Taiwan was part of the PROC, so it should be reunited with the motherland. This particular belief is pretty strong on the mainland due to nationalistic pride and control of the newspapers. In Taiwan, people just want the right to elect their own leaders democratically; regardless of where they stand on the reunification issue, they don't want to turn into another Hong Kong, and that is the public relations problem that PROC is faced with. They want to maintain an authoritarian government over a population that is used to publicly berating its own leaders.
And in fact, work done at MAYA Viz has already being tested and has already been deployed by the army. ...I wonder what patent application they're going to try to file if there's already this prior art on this research dating back to 2001.
-kevin