Correct, although appetite is a primitive function in the brain, so it's misleading to suggest the brain can "modify it anyway it sees fit" and we know it can't since we'd have far fewer overweight people. Appetite is a function of the brain itself, the brain doesn't need to manipulate the gut in order to influence it.
Only if you believe that appetite is something manipulatable by the brain. We know it doesn't work that way and, furthermore, what's being talked about is how things work, not discovering new things we didn't know we could do.
We know that we can't simply manipulate hunger by thinking but, rather, it's the other way around, that hunger manipulates our thinking. This information doesn't have "profound implications" on what we already know doesn't happen, it suggests how something we know happens works.
Porn was a major factor but not the only one, as you say. Furthermore, porn is just one content type and porn producers were subject to the same restrictions as you mentioned. Finally, VHS had something Beta did not, 2 hour play. That was a far bigger deal than image quality as TVs weren't always very good back then. VHS won because there could only be one winning format (due to expense) and 2 hours per tape was more valuable than better resolution.
It's funny how those who like to cite VHS vs. Beta don't demonstrate sufficient knowledge about it to even prove they were alive back then.
The issue isn't whether useful features can be mapped to hard-press, it's whether hard-press itself is a useful gesture. It is not because it works terribly.
...and I always disabled 3D Touch to avoid the annoyance until Apple introduced features that could only be accessed using it. 3D Touch is a feature I wish Apple would hurry up and delete.
If everyone can read then reading will be a useless skill.
If everyone knew math then math would be a useless skill.
While they are at it, they should teach kids that their coding skills are interchangeable with everyone else's, that every problem is shallow, anticipated and already solved by a pattern, that every task requires the same set of skills, that future learning and experience are irrelevant, that their effort only amounts to units of work, that the only thing of value is their burn rate, that they should grow accustomed to being micromanaged by entire teams of peers every hour of every day, and that any problem not adaptable to this approach is not worth pursuing. That way they'll not only have coding skills, they will have Agile skills and will understand why their work only demands minimum wage. That way all our critical systems will rely on software developed with the quality of a MacDonalds hamburger to the extent that software of complexity can be developed at all.
The threat to programming isn't the education of our children, its the programmers.
What's worse, ignoring a project's potential for failure (sunken cost fallacy) or insuring it (Agile)? Nothing damages long term potential more than shortsightedness and Agile's guiding principle is, essentially, shortsightedness (slavery to short term measurables) along, of course, with the mythical man-month assumptions than enable it.
Yes, and C is neither a "fancy assembler" nor "almost machine code". These are statements of an ignorant person.
Yes, "we can call typed functions through" "void pointers" but we do so by declaring what that the pointer type is, and this is not possible because "Assembly doesn't care" but because it is useful. Seriously, this guy is an idiot. While I have no doubt "Cook and the people he worked with discovered numerous native C problems", I also have no doubt that countless programmers discovered them long before these fools did, including me before they even saw puberty.
"I favor progressive taxation. Meaning the larger benefit a person receives from society the more they pay for it's upkeep and improvement."
There is literally no way to interpret "progressive taxation" in this way, nor is there any way to measure "benefit a person receives from society" sufficiently to support such a taxation approach.
But these are a consequence of allowing mixed case identifiers, something you WANT to do. The other is a consequence of something you don't want to do. A feature or capability without redeeming qualities shouldn't be done simply because it can be. Doing the right thing isn't about whose responsibility it is.
Grumpy old men prefer big screens to compensate for their deteriorating eyesight and their oversized shorts have pockets plenty big enough. That is, of course, assuming they use a cell phone at all. Furthermore, grumpy old men don't carry around tablets or notebooks for that matter.
You are not a grumpy old man, just a whiner who can't imagine anything beyond what you already know. Not long ago your "iPhone6 size" was absurdly big.
The fact is, hate speech often does quite well in "a free marketplace of ideas" especially when there's no responsibility or accountability and there's anonymity in it's place.
"Sen. Wyden is interested in the opposite: infringing civil rights."
There is no evidence of that.
"Failure by the companies to properly understand the premise of the law is the beginning of the end of the protections it provides."
Wyden is talking about legal protections enjoyed by corporations hosting content, not about "infringing civil rights". It appears you "fail to understand the premise of the law" as well.
"Calories eaten is under everyones voluntary control. I'm not sure what your point is here."
Spoken like someone who's never experienced weight problems. There's a real pattern here with you.
Do you think that people desire to be obese? Do you think it's only you who's figured out the obvious? Is it really as simple as a character flaw that makes everyone else not as good as you?
No, it's just a mislabeling of "calorie deficit" and perhaps "weight gain" as well.
I would suggest you try harder to understand the complexity of the issue rather than assert useless and meaningless claims of spontaneous energy creation.
It's simple to a simpleton whose never lost weight in the real world. Anyone can be a weight loss champion on the internet but demonstrating a real understanding of weight loss is required to be convincing. You aren't convincing.
A calorie excess / deficit is necessary but is not sufficient and is only one of a large number of complex interacting elements that are only partially understood, less well understood by you than most of the public. Grow up.
Following this argument to its natural conclusion, only what exists today can possibly be secure because everything that does NOT exist today fails "the security requirement of Availability". Therefore we can conclude that all future systems are insecure for precisely the same reason you conclude that a "micro-kernel architecture ala Tanenbaum fails the security requirement of Availability."
Linux also failed to build "what people need" until it did. It's an ignorant argument useful for nothing beyond getting "Insightful" mods from people who know even less than you do.
No, it's not and there is no jury. The author of the format stated the correct pronunciation so it's not up for debate. Since the day GIF was used it has been pronounced "jif", it's only recently that children feel entitled to ignore history because they can't be bothered to learn it.
"So to me, GIF has always been the same "G" I say "graphics" with, just with "iff" on the end: "giff""
When you create a format that the entire world uses, feel free to name it how you like. Meanwhile, your opinion on the work of others doesn't matter.
Why stop with phones? This logic applies to literally any device. A designer's word is utterly meaningless so post complete documentation of every detail of design or conclude that it is unsafe and intends to harm you.
Do without a phone if you are so paranoid. Better yet, go live in the wilderness...or admit that this is nothing more than an open source troll.
The rest of us understand that some level of trust must always exist, that absolutist arguments like this are worthless, and that companies have good reasons to protect intellectual property.
Slashdot Mirror
Correct, although appetite is a primitive function in the brain, so it's misleading to suggest the brain can "modify it anyway it sees fit" and we know it can't since we'd have far fewer overweight people. Appetite is a function of the brain itself, the brain doesn't need to manipulate the gut in order to influence it.
Only if you believe that appetite is something manipulatable by the brain. We know it doesn't work that way and, furthermore, what's being talked about is how things work, not discovering new things we didn't know we could do.
We know that we can't simply manipulate hunger by thinking but, rather, it's the other way around, that hunger manipulates our thinking. This information doesn't have "profound implications" on what we already know doesn't happen, it suggests how something we know happens works.
Porn was a major factor but not the only one, as you say. Furthermore, porn is just one content type and porn producers were subject to the same restrictions as you mentioned. Finally, VHS had something Beta did not, 2 hour play. That was a far bigger deal than image quality as TVs weren't always very good back then. VHS won because there could only be one winning format (due to expense) and 2 hours per tape was more valuable than better resolution.
It's funny how those who like to cite VHS vs. Beta don't demonstrate sufficient knowledge about it to even prove they were alive back then.
The issue isn't whether useful features can be mapped to hard-press, it's whether hard-press itself is a useful gesture. It is not because it works terribly.
...and I always disabled 3D Touch to avoid the annoyance until Apple introduced features that could only be accessed using it. 3D Touch is a feature I wish Apple would hurry up and delete.
"...but nothing a kid writes is going to interact with the internet..."
"...You woudn't teach any sort of programming by starting with these "pull crap from a library" programming in any case..."
Perhaps you should start by educating yourself on what and how children learn. You are clueless.
Wow, absolutely zero reading comprehension.
The statement was "If everyone can code, then coding wil be a worthless skill", not "everyone can code, therefore coding is a worthless skill".
Try to keep up, Bill.
If everyone can read then reading will be a useless skill.
If everyone knew math then math would be a useless skill.
While they are at it, they should teach kids that their coding skills are interchangeable with everyone else's, that every problem is shallow, anticipated and already solved by a pattern, that every task requires the same set of skills, that future learning and experience are irrelevant, that their effort only amounts to units of work, that the only thing of value is their burn rate, that they should grow accustomed to being micromanaged by entire teams of peers every hour of every day, and that any problem not adaptable to this approach is not worth pursuing. That way they'll not only have coding skills, they will have Agile skills and will understand why their work only demands minimum wage. That way all our critical systems will rely on software developed with the quality of a MacDonalds hamburger to the extent that software of complexity can be developed at all.
The threat to programming isn't the education of our children, its the programmers.
What's worse, ignoring a project's potential for failure (sunken cost fallacy) or insuring it (Agile)? Nothing damages long term potential more than shortsightedness and Agile's guiding principle is, essentially, shortsightedness (slavery to short term measurables) along, of course, with the mythical man-month assumptions than enable it.
Yes, and C is neither a "fancy assembler" nor "almost machine code". These are statements of an ignorant person.
Yes, "we can call typed functions through" "void pointers" but we do so by declaring what that the pointer type is, and this is not possible because "Assembly doesn't care" but because it is useful. Seriously, this guy is an idiot. While I have no doubt "Cook and the people he worked with discovered numerous native C problems", I also have no doubt that countless programmers discovered them long before these fools did, including me before they even saw puberty.
"I favor progressive taxation. Meaning the larger benefit a person receives from society the more they pay for it's upkeep and improvement."
There is literally no way to interpret "progressive taxation" in this way, nor is there any way to measure "benefit a person receives from society" sufficiently to support such a taxation approach.
But these are a consequence of allowing mixed case identifiers, something you WANT to do. The other is a consequence of something you don't want to do. A feature or capability without redeeming qualities shouldn't be done simply because it can be. Doing the right thing isn't about whose responsibility it is.
Grumpy old men prefer big screens to compensate for their deteriorating eyesight and their oversized shorts have pockets plenty big enough. That is, of course, assuming they use a cell phone at all. Furthermore, grumpy old men don't carry around tablets or notebooks for that matter.
You are not a grumpy old man, just a whiner who can't imagine anything beyond what you already know. Not long ago your "iPhone6 size" was absurdly big.
"Yet somehow it runs at 150C, so salt doesn't mean NaCl, which melts at 801 degrees centegrade."
So it's the temperature that tipped you off that they weren't referring to table salt? You have quite an intellect, Bruce.
Yet somehow it runs at 150C! What is this, a school for ants?!?
Exactly.
The fact is, hate speech often does quite well in "a free marketplace of ideas" especially when there's no responsibility or accountability and there's anonymity in it's place.
"Sen. Wyden is interested in the opposite: infringing civil rights."
There is no evidence of that.
"Failure by the companies to properly understand the premise of the law is the beginning of the end of the protections it provides."
Wyden is talking about legal protections enjoyed by corporations hosting content, not about "infringing civil rights". It appears you "fail to understand the premise of the law" as well.
Funny how hate-tinged your free speech advocacy is.
"Calories eaten is under everyones voluntary control. I'm not sure what your point is here."
Spoken like someone who's never experienced weight problems. There's a real pattern here with you.
Do you think that people desire to be obese? Do you think it's only you who's figured out the obvious? Is it really as simple as a character flaw that makes everyone else not as good as you?
No, it's just a mislabeling of "calorie deficit" and perhaps "weight gain" as well.
I would suggest you try harder to understand the complexity of the issue rather than assert useless and meaningless claims of spontaneous energy creation.
"Weightloss is not easy, but its simple."
It's simple to a simpleton whose never lost weight in the real world. Anyone can be a weight loss champion on the internet but demonstrating a real understanding of weight loss is required to be convincing. You aren't convincing.
A calorie excess / deficit is necessary but is not sufficient and is only one of a large number of complex interacting elements that are only partially understood, less well understood by you than most of the public. Grow up.
Following this argument to its natural conclusion, only what exists today can possibly be secure because everything that does NOT exist today fails "the security requirement of Availability". Therefore we can conclude that all future systems are insecure for precisely the same reason you conclude that a "micro-kernel architecture ala Tanenbaum fails the security requirement of Availability."
Linux also failed to build "what people need" until it did. It's an ignorant argument useful for nothing beyond getting "Insightful" mods from people who know even less than you do.
What was the guidance from the creators of the format, and why does that matter?
Imagine two words with the same pronunciation! How can we ever cope!
"Jury is still out on the "GIF" pronounciation."
No, it's not and there is no jury. The author of the format stated the correct pronunciation so it's not up for debate. Since the day GIF was used it has been pronounced "jif", it's only recently that children feel entitled to ignore history because they can't be bothered to learn it.
"So to me, GIF has always been the same "G" I say "graphics" with, just with "iff" on the end: "giff""
When you create a format that the entire world uses, feel free to name it how you like. Meanwhile, your opinion on the work of others doesn't matter.
You talk like this is new. It's not.
Can't wait to see Alex Jones show "Google, Apple, et all" who's boss.
Why stop with phones? This logic applies to literally any device. A designer's word is utterly meaningless so post complete documentation of every detail of design or conclude that it is unsafe and intends to harm you.
Do without a phone if you are so paranoid. Better yet, go live in the wilderness...or admit that this is nothing more than an open source troll.
The rest of us understand that some level of trust must always exist, that absolutist arguments like this are worthless, and that companies have good reasons to protect intellectual property.