With the web finally hitting magazine-quality typography, there's definitely a need for a proper layout engine that's flexible and can achieve exactly what graphic designers want.
The problem is, a flexible layout engine is really a declarative programming language and most graphic designers are horrible at programming, thus the layouts they design are extremely buggy. Yet we can't just let programmers design layouts because they tend to be horrible at graphic design. What's needed is a high-level layout language that can be given a template, produces a consistent look and feel on all devices yet optimizes the details for them, and most importantly any bugs (such as elements overlaying each other) will manifest themselves right there on the designer's display.
You'll need a lot of bulldozers, some new industries, and government to lower the outrageous taxes the city has.
Why bulldoze? Move the remaining people into a single area of the city and use the rest as a post-industrial theme park - Futureland for the 21st century.
Ukraine sells Chernobyl tours, so there's a precedent for turning man-made disasters into cash cows.
This statement of opinion has absolutely nothing to do with the person's teaching ability, and should not be something which would result in a firing, especially since it was done on his own time, outside the classroom, didn't involve his students... and frankly speaking in most cases it's completely 100% accurate.
I dunno. Implying you're sexually provoked by how barely-teens dress and have trouble ignoring that ("dress like whores") seems like a good reason for other people to keep their children away from you, especially in the context of a power relationship involving lots of unsupervised time together.
Nation-state acts to further its own perceived self-interests. News at eleven!
So do muggers. Does that excuse them?
Realpolitik is a bitch sometimes, isn't it?
"Realpolitik" is usually used as an excuse for extremely short-sighted stupidity, which ignores both the enemies you're making and the geopolitical climate you're creating. US made its choices, now it just has to live with the consequences, such as its soiled reputation.
When you're fighting for national survival you're going to side with the despot that will ally with you over the democracy that won't.
And when you aren't, it's stupid to engage in such desperate gambits.
The These new republicans, at least from what I can see, are the ones who are against the NSA and big government, something bush 2 and mccain are for.
But will they still be against a large and powerful government when they've spent years getting that power for themselves? Throwing the ring into the fire is easy to talk about, but a lot harder to do; and that's assuming they aren't Gollum wearing a mask to begin with.
But hey, hope and change. This time it'll work for sure!
Drones don't need training, they just need to be programmed.
Training is programming. The pilot is building a subroutine in his brain to do flying. With enough training, it eventually gets optimized enough to run on the background, at which point we call the skill automatic. Now, the reason it takes training to reach that point is that you need to define program parameters (how the plane acts in various situations), and that takes data. The second phase - optimization - can, to some extent, be done through image training (simulating the plane in your mind, however in practice you need to interleave data gathering and optimizing to minimize space taken by intermediate buffers), but the data gathering can't. And you can't skip it when programming computers either.
So yes, drones need training. The real advantage is that once you train one drone you can copy it endlessly.
Why didn't the wholesale electric prices rise in tandem with the gas price to keep generation economical?
How would the price of electricity affect the relative price of gas to jet fuel?
Why didn't the generators use the derivatives market to hedge against spikes in gas prices so they'd be able to keep buying as demand/price rose?
Derivatives, like all contracts, are only worth something if they're enforced. If there's a genuine primary energy shortage in the middle of a cold snap, you'll get emergency rationing and the derivatives are worthless. On the other hand, if there's a surplus, everything is fine and the the contract is enforced, leaving you paying a likely higher price. So it makes more sense to just burn jet fuel when you need to.
Can you really study another culture without knowing some of their language?
"Really" and "some" are weasel words. "Really" is setting up a No True Scotsman fallacy: sure, you can study, but you didn't learn the language so you didn't really study. And "some" is impliying that learning a single word here and a phrase there to name a new concept you come across is the same as studying the language itself, yet I can pretty much guarantee that you don't know every single word in your native language.
Specifically, how are the "technology workers" a "corrupt overclass"?
It was Perkins who hijacked the discussion into being about "one percent" (his words), which he then further confirmed to mean "the rich". And they are very much a corrupt overclass who are pretty much forcing a revolution by refusing to think beyond their noses and allocate sufficient resources for maintenance of social and physical infrastructure. Which, in turn, means if they end up in a guillotine, it should count as Darwin Award.
A bit more: is "working for their own benefit" imoral now? ('cause illegal is not)
That's a good point; it's very much the opposite to religion that continues to hold fast to myth and legend.
Myth and legend evolve over time, which is a good thing too, since otherwise society couldn't. So do religions, in fact they're notorious for splintering into competing sects over the stupidest of reasons. Why do you make assertions that are obviously at odds with observable reality?
First of all, if you need public assistance then maybe you shouldn't be having children.
A provocative sentiment. And one that could easily gain support in current political climate. It serves as a kind of naturally occurring evolutionary filter: can a society look beyond immediate profit to the obvious long-term consequences? If yes, it passes, if no, it's culture will disappear either through outright demographic collapse or by being diluted by immigrants, the latter requiring it to have at least something worth salvaging.
Maybe Darwin Awards should have a category for nations?
My grass doesn't care if your sick and it needs to be cut. Sorry I will find someone else to do it.
Well, at least the germs will go to the right address.
Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
True, but as long as people insist that their needs are more important than the needs of others - like you did above - it's the closest we can get. Selfishness is neither lovable nor civilized.
It does not help the people there, to boycott their only product and to boycott the only major export from the entire country. It causes economic devastation to a country to prevent its exports.
Which is still better than letting said exports fund local warlords' reigns of terror. It absolutely helps people to ensure that whoever keeps stamping their boot on their face can't afford heavier ones.
Weren't there some people that committed suicide after their characters were killed in the game?
Please tell me you're joking, and don't actually think Dark Dungeons is a documentary.
I don't think time spent studying the monster manuals or magic would be of much aid in the actual spiritual journey we face on earth even if you could make various other claims of benefit.
It's amazing how many people have apparently completed their own journey despite still inhabiting their mortal coils, which they obviously must have because they have the time and wisdom to worry about the effect other people's pasttimes might have on reaching their destinations.
Also, while each life stage certainly has preparing for the next as an important component, that isn't the only component. You are a living being, not just a production facility for your future self. The latter is committing the fallacy - and sin - of thinking people as merely tools to be used and discarded, with no value beyond their utility.
Also, I doubt that very many devout Christians, reference above, were getting high on coke.
From what I've seen, the "Christian" drugs of choice are hate, lust for power and fear. Frankly, coke would be less harmful to the spirit.
In situations where the currency was deflationary (money steadily gaining value over time, commodities steadily falling in price), people didn't stop all purchases. (you still need to buy food to live) But purchases dropped significantly and economic activity tanked. Most recent example is Japan during the Lost Decade of 90's - 00's.
But is that a problem, really? If people spend less on luxuries that will directly help conserve both resources and the environment. Isn't that exactly what we should be doing to avert disaster - curb unnecessary consumption? It's the very thing carbon credits and -taxes were meant to achieve, so if deflation accomplishes the same thing, what's the problem?
Even if Bitcoin crashes and burns, we need to rethink our entire concept of economy. Industrial Age is ending, and Information Age is beginning. So... what is this discussion worth, for example? What value does it generate? What about Wikipedia or Wikia or DeviantArt? What about obscure things like tulpas which are spreading through the Internet? And does it make any difference that these things are not "economic activity" under conventional definition when all participants to the exchange of information are likely to come out better off?
The fact that people sink to destitution when productivity has never been higher strongly implies that there is something very wrong in our approach to economics in this new era. Growth in Information Age comes from science and culture, and it would be best to consider how best to encourage those rather than try to maximize an obsolete barometer that attempts to capture the activity of an entire society into a single number. Increasingly hairbrained DRM schemes trying to force information to behave like a physical good don't help, either.
The wealthy tend to hold the large net positions of cash so they tend to benefit the most.
The wealthy will always benefit the most from any decision since they or their bought politicians are the ones who make the decisions.
It favors investments in financial instruments over real productive assets.
Which is something we need to do anyway. Real productive assets require energy, which is getting increasingly scarce. We have ahead of us an overhaul of most of our energy infrastructure, which unfortunately translates to decades of little to no growth because old plants shut down as new ones come online. Ideally, we'd admit reality and adapt our economy to a steady state, but in practice the self-delusion of growing the economy on paper only - or "financial instruments" if you prefer - is likely the best we can manage.
No, it's for people who want to see society become completely rent-based. You can't buy anything, thus you don't own anything, and so can't accumulate wealth and rise through the ranks. Stay in your place, peon!
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is, a flexible layout engine is really a declarative programming language and most graphic designers are horrible at programming, thus the layouts they design are extremely buggy. Yet we can't just let programmers design layouts because they tend to be horrible at graphic design. What's needed is a high-level layout language that can be given a template, produces a consistent look and feel on all devices yet optimizes the details for them, and most importantly any bugs (such as elements overlaying each other) will manifest themselves right there on the designer's display.
Why bulldoze? Move the remaining people into a single area of the city and use the rest as a post-industrial theme park - Futureland for the 21st century.
Ukraine sells Chernobyl tours, so there's a precedent for turning man-made disasters into cash cows.
So? What's going to get damaged, exactly speaking?
I dunno. Implying you're sexually provoked by how barely-teens dress and have trouble ignoring that ("dress like whores") seems like a good reason for other people to keep their children away from you, especially in the context of a power relationship involving lots of unsupervised time together.
Funny, I thought that was the defining trait of the Confederacy, at least for non-integral values of "people".
So do muggers. Does that excuse them?
"Realpolitik" is usually used as an excuse for extremely short-sighted stupidity, which ignores both the enemies you're making and the geopolitical climate you're creating. US made its choices, now it just has to live with the consequences, such as its soiled reputation.
And when you aren't, it's stupid to engage in such desperate gambits.
But will they still be against a large and powerful government when they've spent years getting that power for themselves? Throwing the ring into the fire is easy to talk about, but a lot harder to do; and that's assuming they aren't Gollum wearing a mask to begin with.
But hey, hope and change. This time it'll work for sure!
Training is programming. The pilot is building a subroutine in his brain to do flying. With enough training, it eventually gets optimized enough to run on the background, at which point we call the skill automatic. Now, the reason it takes training to reach that point is that you need to define program parameters (how the plane acts in various situations), and that takes data. The second phase - optimization - can, to some extent, be done through image training (simulating the plane in your mind, however in practice you need to interleave data gathering and optimizing to minimize space taken by intermediate buffers), but the data gathering can't. And you can't skip it when programming computers either.
So yes, drones need training. The real advantage is that once you train one drone you can copy it endlessly.
Which says nothing of Mann but does give the rest of us a perfectly accurate view of Mark Steyn and National Review magazine.
How would the price of electricity affect the relative price of gas to jet fuel?
Derivatives, like all contracts, are only worth something if they're enforced. If there's a genuine primary energy shortage in the middle of a cold snap, you'll get emergency rationing and the derivatives are worthless. On the other hand, if there's a surplus, everything is fine and the the contract is enforced, leaving you paying a likely higher price. So it makes more sense to just burn jet fuel when you need to.
Or so I'd imagine, anyway.
You didn't know bread can get moldy?
"Really" and "some" are weasel words. "Really" is setting up a No True Scotsman fallacy: sure, you can study, but you didn't learn the language so you didn't really study. And "some" is impliying that learning a single word here and a phrase there to name a new concept you come across is the same as studying the language itself, yet I can pretty much guarantee that you don't know every single word in your native language.
It was Perkins who hijacked the discussion into being about "one percent" (his words), which he then further confirmed to mean "the rich". And they are very much a corrupt overclass who are pretty much forcing a revolution by refusing to think beyond their noses and allocate sufficient resources for maintenance of social and physical infrastructure. Which, in turn, means if they end up in a guillotine, it should count as Darwin Award.
No, but making others work for your benefit at below-sustenance wages and then playing shell games with said wages is.
Water.
Myth and legend evolve over time, which is a good thing too, since otherwise society couldn't. So do religions, in fact they're notorious for splintering into competing sects over the stupidest of reasons. Why do you make assertions that are obviously at odds with observable reality?
A provocative sentiment. And one that could easily gain support in current political climate. It serves as a kind of naturally occurring evolutionary filter: can a society look beyond immediate profit to the obvious long-term consequences? If yes, it passes, if no, it's culture will disappear either through outright demographic collapse or by being diluted by immigrants, the latter requiring it to have at least something worth salvaging.
Maybe Darwin Awards should have a category for nations?
Well, at least the germs will go to the right address.
True, but as long as people insist that their needs are more important than the needs of others - like you did above - it's the closest we can get. Selfishness is neither lovable nor civilized.
Which is still better than letting said exports fund local warlords' reigns of terror. It absolutely helps people to ensure that whoever keeps stamping their boot on their face can't afford heavier ones.
Please tell me you're joking, and don't actually think Dark Dungeons is a documentary.
It's amazing how many people have apparently completed their own journey despite still inhabiting their mortal coils, which they obviously must have because they have the time and wisdom to worry about the effect other people's pasttimes might have on reaching their destinations.
Also, while each life stage certainly has preparing for the next as an important component, that isn't the only component. You are a living being, not just a production facility for your future self. The latter is committing the fallacy - and sin - of thinking people as merely tools to be used and discarded, with no value beyond their utility.
From what I've seen, the "Christian" drugs of choice are hate, lust for power and fear. Frankly, coke would be less harmful to the spirit.
But is that a problem, really? If people spend less on luxuries that will directly help conserve both resources and the environment. Isn't that exactly what we should be doing to avert disaster - curb unnecessary consumption? It's the very thing carbon credits and -taxes were meant to achieve, so if deflation accomplishes the same thing, what's the problem?
Even if Bitcoin crashes and burns, we need to rethink our entire concept of economy. Industrial Age is ending, and Information Age is beginning. So... what is this discussion worth, for example? What value does it generate? What about Wikipedia or Wikia or DeviantArt? What about obscure things like tulpas which are spreading through the Internet? And does it make any difference that these things are not "economic activity" under conventional definition when all participants to the exchange of information are likely to come out better off?
The fact that people sink to destitution when productivity has never been higher strongly implies that there is something very wrong in our approach to economics in this new era. Growth in Information Age comes from science and culture, and it would be best to consider how best to encourage those rather than try to maximize an obsolete barometer that attempts to capture the activity of an entire society into a single number. Increasingly hairbrained DRM schemes trying to force information to behave like a physical good don't help, either.
The wealthy will always benefit the most from any decision since they or their bought politicians are the ones who make the decisions.
Which is something we need to do anyway. Real productive assets require energy, which is getting increasingly scarce. We have ahead of us an overhaul of most of our energy infrastructure, which unfortunately translates to decades of little to no growth because old plants shut down as new ones come online. Ideally, we'd admit reality and adapt our economy to a steady state, but in practice the self-delusion of growing the economy on paper only - or "financial instruments" if you prefer - is likely the best we can manage.
At the speed of light, that academic journey would had taken 170 years. But I suppose you have a good enough excuse for not knowing it :^).
Or, more likely, no one is and the article is just China selling its re-education camps with a "think of the chiiildren" moral panic.
No, it's for people who want to see society become completely rent-based. You can't buy anything, thus you don't own anything, and so can't accumulate wealth and rise through the ranks. Stay in your place, peon!
Fixed that for you.