What a glorious dream!
Only it's no bloody good if your refridgerator's computer tells the stores computer that your out of milk. I'm sure it's very nice to know, but it doesn't do anything for the cow, the farmer, the store owner, or you. Same thing with your security system. It's all well and good that the security system's computer calls the police's computer, but it doesn't do anything to help *you* get a *cop* when you need one.
The previous poster is just excited because the read a book called the "E-Myth", probably because they thought it was about the dotcom crash, but now they think they're ready for a sales job (middle management), I mean entrepeneurship.
exactly what I thought. I can picture the interior monologue now, when some moral crisis comes up:
I didn't want to, but I had no other choice. If I didn't kill the nice secretary, I would have been caught with the plans to the Death Star...er, concept sketch for the new Palm Pilot faux-leather carrying case. If I don't get these drawings to my boss, I'll lose my job just like my salt-of-the-earth buddy down on the loading dock who talks just like a young Marlon Brando. That's why I had to run the red light. I'll never forgive him for this. But I won't go back to flipping burgers!
Nope, the Universe isn't an authority unto itself. With regard to the laws of physics, the final arbitration goes to a three panel court: God, Buddha, and the Holy Ghost. Sometimes an eminent deceased physicist such as Einstein, Newton, or Xuipleeb7 will sustitute on the tryptich while HG is on vacation.
A case was overturned on one of these occasions when a dispute broke out between Buddha and Einstein over Pascal's wager, in which the Enlightened One taunted the famed Relativist, turning his belief in God doesn't hurt quote on its head, applying it to Physics.
I haven't seen his code (and I doubt you have either), but in general, static arrays are almost always a good idea if you can use them. Chances are, you're going to end up "caching" your dynamic data at some point into some kind of (probably dynamic) array, just to avoid the waste of time memory allocation and clean up created by dynamic arrays.
Torvalds also made mention (a while ago) something about reusability just being an excuse for people who are too lazy to rewrite from scratch. Wish I could find that quote.
all I get (in XP pro) when I type set/? is a refresher on.BAT scripting, only some of which has to do with environment variables, but it still doesn't tell you how to set an environment variable other than in the current "shell" or batch file.
no, there are lots of non "lossy" formats (wav.zip) being a very simple one that can fit 2 CDs worth of music on one disk.
But I said a lossy "copy." Maybe I shouldn't have used "lossy" since it is associated with encoding. Burning a.wav to.mp3 is technically a lossy copy, because the encoding loses (actually discards) information, but copying it doesn't lose anything. Maybe I shouldn't have used "lossy" since it is associated with encoding. But what I meant is that you would have to have a lossy capture from the protected format, not as bad as, since it's not analog, but similar to the loss going from CD to audio cassette.
well, -ology, as everyone knows, means the study of things in groups (Biology, the study of pairs; Psychology, the study of Psychologists) A triolgy is about a manage a trois. Which, I'm sure you'll all agree, was not in either the HGTTG or the LOTR. Hence the "increasingly misnamed" and "whole new meaning" bits.
I imagine the English just sit around and laugh at their own poor English all day. It goes beyond just weird colloquialism to just a bad understanding of their own language. No wonder the people in India never really learned to speak it.
Microsoft isn't "sufficiently concerned", they just have nothing else to do. They've beat all other comers, and are waiting for something else, and are shooting at flies (and flightless birds) for fun, now.
So who is right; you or the Apple apologist who claims that you can convert to any other format? I'm guessing legally, you are closer to the truth, but technically, what he claims is possible, just not as easy as he claims, at least not without a lossy copy.
People aren't as stupid as capitalists would like them to be and socialists aren't as smart as they think they are.
That's the simple corralary. "Promoting" the common welfare is not even remotely similar to "providing" the common welfare. That has nothing to do with democracy.
Socialists, such as yourself, suppose you know what is best for everyone. If you really believed in democracy, you would let the people decide for themselves, even if what they chose is not always what you think is "best".
Socialism and democracy are incompatible. Because once you dictate what is being provided, you must use coersion to achieve it.
Slashdot Mirror
What a glorious dream! Only it's no bloody good if your refridgerator's computer tells the stores computer that your out of milk. I'm sure it's very nice to know, but it doesn't do anything for the cow, the farmer, the store owner, or you. Same thing with your security system. It's all well and good that the security system's computer calls the police's computer, but it doesn't do anything to help *you* get a *cop* when you need one.
The previous poster is just excited because the read a book called the "E-Myth", probably because they thought it was about the dotcom crash, but now they think they're ready for a sales job (middle management), I mean entrepeneurship.
Hey, now, wait a minute! I didn't hear anyone say "semi-believable."
exactly what I thought. I can picture the interior monologue now, when some moral crisis comes up: I didn't want to, but I had no other choice. If I didn't kill the nice secretary, I would have been caught with the plans to the Death Star...er, concept sketch for the new Palm Pilot faux-leather carrying case. If I don't get these drawings to my boss, I'll lose my job just like my salt-of-the-earth buddy down on the loading dock who talks just like a young Marlon Brando. That's why I had to run the red light. I'll never forgive him for this. But I won't go back to flipping burgers!
Nope, the Universe isn't an authority unto itself. With regard to the laws of physics, the final arbitration goes to a three panel court: God, Buddha, and the Holy Ghost. Sometimes an eminent deceased physicist such as Einstein, Newton, or Xuipleeb7 will sustitute on the tryptich while HG is on vacation. A case was overturned on one of these occasions when a dispute broke out between Buddha and Einstein over Pascal's wager, in which the Enlightened One taunted the famed Relativist, turning his belief in God doesn't hurt quote on its head, applying it to Physics.
He would never do something like that
Austin isn't that cool. And Seattle sucks.
Yeah, '98 was the year I switched too.
I haven't seen his code (and I doubt you have either), but in general, static arrays are almost always a good idea if you can use them. Chances are, you're going to end up "caching" your dynamic data at some point into some kind of (probably dynamic) array, just to avoid the waste of time memory allocation and clean up created by dynamic arrays.
Torvalds also made mention (a while ago) something about reusability just being an excuse for people who are too lazy to rewrite from scratch. Wish I could find that quote.
all I get (in XP pro) when I type set/? is a refresher on .BAT scripting, only some of which has to do with environment variables, but it still doesn't tell you how to set an environment variable other than in the current "shell" or batch file.
no, there are lots of non "lossy" formats (wav.zip) being a very simple one that can fit 2 CDs worth of music on one disk. But I said a lossy "copy." Maybe I shouldn't have used "lossy" since it is associated with encoding. Burning a .wav to .mp3 is technically a lossy copy, because the encoding loses (actually discards) information, but copying it doesn't lose anything. Maybe I shouldn't have used "lossy" since it is associated with encoding. But what I meant is that you would have to have a lossy capture from the protected format, not as bad as, since it's not analog, but similar to the loss going from CD to audio cassette.
Friends? I'm getting the DVDs tonight!!!!
well, -ology, as everyone knows, means the study of things in groups (Biology, the study of pairs; Psychology, the study of Psychologists) A triolgy is about a manage a trois. Which, I'm sure you'll all agree, was not in either the HGTTG or the LOTR. Hence the "increasingly misnamed" and "whole new meaning" bits.
I'd hire you on to the screenwriting team, if any positions were open, and I was in HR
sounds like a crosswalk. To an American, as it stands, it's funny. But to a Brit, "trampled by nearsighted Zebras at a crosswalk would be better."
I imagine the English just sit around and laugh at their own poor English all day. It goes beyond just weird colloquialism to just a bad understanding of their own language. No wonder the people in India never really learned to speak it.
Microsoft isn't "sufficiently concerned", they just have nothing else to do. They've beat all other comers, and are waiting for something else, and are shooting at flies (and flightless birds) for fun, now.
welcome to democracy. It works pretty good. See, the post you liked ended with a score of 5.
So who is right; you or the Apple apologist who claims that you can convert to any other format? I'm guessing legally, you are closer to the truth, but technically, what he claims is possible, just not as easy as he claims, at least not without a lossy copy.
So is "reverse-blackmail" to be the new open source business model?
right. This is complicity with Caldera's scam, as far as I'm concerned.
People aren't as stupid as capitalists would like them to be and socialists aren't as smart as they think they are.
That's the simple corralary. "Promoting" the common welfare is not even remotely similar to "providing" the common welfare. That has nothing to do with democracy.
Socialists, such as yourself, suppose you know what is best for everyone. If you really believed in democracy, you would let the people decide for themselves, even if what they chose is not always what you think is "best".
Socialism and democracy are incompatible. Because once you dictate what is being provided, you must use coersion to achieve it.
and socialists aren't as smart as they think they are.
You'd be surprised how important a good foundation is.