Either make it compatible - i.e. an old language with new features - or provide me with an automated conversion tool.
That's only really possible if the new language has the same set of concepts than the old one, in which case it doesn't really bring anything new to the table. Sure, you might kludge together a convertor between, say, a procedural and object-oriented language, but the end result is going to be object-oriented in name only, so why bother?
It would be more useful to provide clear and simple interface to make using existing libraries from the new language as easy as possible.
If you really want to get an idea of bizarre US policy look at Cuba. Cuba hasnt sponsored Terrorism in 40 years and is still embargoed while we did business with Qaddafi and Iran.
How is that bizarre? Terrorism doesn't threaten the rich and the powerful - if anything, it works in their favour by presenting a fearsome but ultimately powerless boogeyman to act as an excuse for depriving everyone else of freedom in the name of "security" - while communism does.
What's surprising is that somebody bothered to verify a result that's obvious to everybody with a basic understanding of physics. If the claim weren't true, the machinery that they used to perform the experiment wouldn't have worked either.
Science publishing is not what it used to be.
You are absolutely right. And that's why we have modern technology and, in fact, physics themselves: because people began verifying obvious "facts".
There is no other energy source that can create problems on such scale in such a short time.
Except for water power, where a dam bursting can kill hundreds of thousands and wipe out cities. Or wind power, where no wind means no electricity. Or geothermal, where the water used for heat transport dissolves all kinds of interesting chemicals from deep down and spreads them into groundwater should containment fail. Or fossil fuels, the use of which alters the climate of the entire planet in an uncontrollable fashion.
But after hydro, wind, geothermal and fossils, nuclear is clearly the most dangerous energy source.
The citizens have the power to vote their government out of office if it's not abiding by their will. If the government becomes tyrannical, the people have the ability to revolt against it and overthrow it (see also: Arab Spring).
The Japanese government shouldn't listen only to me. The Japanese government should listen to reason and follow the course that's best for their people. In this case, the course that's best for their people is to operate clean, safe, nuclear power plants (and to do their job ensuring those plants remain clean and safe); NOT to shut down power plants that are clean and safe in favor of plants everyone knows are unsafe and horribly unclean.
Unfortunately, what's best for the Japanese people seems to be something else than what the Japanese people want. Which gets us back to my point: either the Japanese government can go against the will of its people, in which case it can also do so when it does not have their best interests at heart, or it can't, in which case the people will get their less-than-optimal way in this matter.
It is impossible to have a government that can ignore the will of its people only when they happen to be wrong.
There just is no reasonable argument in favor of what they're doing right now. They should be fixing the problems of ignorance and fear while getting their people power in the cleanest, safest manner available. There's no justification for poisoning your own people while allowing them to remain ignorant of a better way.
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.
Why can't we get a daily or even real-time heart rate?
Because I, for one, do not want a continuous record of my activity level to be available to doctors, law enforcement, insurance firms or any other entity.
When I retire, I'll probably grow and use. Lot healthier than booze which is my current option.
A more cynical person might wonder if this is one of the very reasons cannabis is opposed. We live in a use-and-throw-away -society where economic output is the beginning and end of everything, and you just know that some beancounter somewhere has calculated how much we'd save if retirees lived a year or two less.
As far as "seeing" in your house the police using IR cameras to spy on you will just motivate everyone that much more to go green faster and heavily insulate their homes making those cameras pretty much useless for spying.
Actually, wouldn't you want to alternate very heat-conductive layers with insulating ones? Heat-conducting layers blur the thermal image, and the heat insulating ones dim it.
Also, you'd want a ground-based heat pump to mask the amount of total heat.
It's not paranoia to lash out at governments that violate the fundamental human rights of their people.
It's not inconsistent to lash out at governments that prefer to let ignorant, fearful people drive policy decisions rather than educating them and doing the right thing.
It is, however, unreasonable to expect the government to listen to you but ignore others. Either the citizens have power over their government or they don't.
But if a reactor blows up for good, the damage stays with you for several hundred years.
Well... no. Chernobyl is turning into a forest right now. It may or may not be a healthy place to live, but it's not Mordor. And of course Hiroshima and Nagasaki, two cities hit with an actual nuclear weapon, have long since recovered.
Nuclear industry needs to be regulated - or better yet, the plants need to be owned and operated by the government rather than for-profit companies - but a plant that blows up is simply an industrial accident like any other, nothing less, nothing more.
What do you mean "only" 10%? That is huge! Why do you act so unimpressed? What on earth do you expect, what counts as huge in your book?
Dunno what would count as "huge", but 33% would count as "adequate" since that's what a country that got 33% of its electricity from nuclear power would need to cut to make do without those power plants.
You sound like an astroturfer trying to set up a strawman.
Why are other people's sacrifices unworthy, in your eyes?
The context of this discussion is the grandparent's assertion that people will only "go out on a limb" if they have a leader willing to show an example, and your answer that Warren Buffet paying at least as much taxes as his secretary might provide this. It does not, for the simple reason that Warren Buffet can still afford everything he could before (everything he wants) after paying a secretary's tax, and this fact is obvious to everyone. This, in turn, makes you bringing him up pretty strange, unless of course you're paid to do so as part of a PR campaign (or are really this much out of touch with reality).
Or alternately, to trump your absurdity: "A real sacrifice is when you lose a limb."
You can certainly spout any absurdities you want, it's a free country after all. It still doesn't make a billionaire hypothethically paying as much rather than less taxes as a secretary a sacrifice in any meaningful way, and certainly doesn't make him an inspiration to others.
Given a choice between a physical book and an ebook at the same price, in most cases I will buy the ebook, because that is the format I prefer.
I would too, if that was actually possible. Unfortunately it isn't. Nobody sells e-goods, they're "licensed", which means that I may use them as long as the publisher lets me in ways they like (which they may change at any time they like), or as long as the publisher or some unrelated third party who happens to own them at the time doesn't mismanage its finances and disappear. Assuming, of course, that some other entity doesn't assert that they own the e-good instead, in which case it gets un-published and disappears like it never was.
But yeah, it would sure be nice to be able to buy e-books.
A real sacrifice means a sacrifice you'll notice without the help of a team of accountants. It means that you can't afford a big-screen TV, car or food, not that you have mere 50 rather than 60 billions in the bank.
Come out of copyright? Nothing has come out of copyright since Mickey Mouse was created; nothing ever will again.
Luckily, in the age of Pirate Bay, that matters less than it used to; unfortunately, in the age of ubiquitous personal (super)computers, it matters a lot more than it used to.
Idiots need to be taken care of, not put in charge.
The issue isn't about putting idiots in charge, the issue is about making it easy for the idiots to hold those in charge accountable for their actions.
Also, every time you exclude a group from voting, you make it easier to exclude another group. Yesterday it was felons, today it's idiots, tomorrow it'll be your turn.
Heck, maybe commenting should be compulsory after you mod...maybe you should have to justify why you modded a post up or down.
Isn't the whole idea behind having multiple different up- and downmods precisely to express this? Besides, if every troll post is guaranteed to generate at least one visible message, stating it was a troll, the end result will be quite a bit of noise.
All currency is imaginary. It's an abstract representation of wealth, which in turn is an abstract representation of resources and services owed to you. And of course the entire concept of owing - debt - is a purely social construct, and thus imaginary.
What really let the internet take off was the fact that people could easily create their own content.
Hear hear. The real value of Internet is that all the stories, art etc. that people create and used to hide in their desk drawers is now available online. Sturgeon's law still holds, of course, but so does the law of lots of monkeys on typewriters. Commercial content is just a nice bonus.
Slashdot Mirror
That's only really possible if the new language has the same set of concepts than the old one, in which case it doesn't really bring anything new to the table. Sure, you might kludge together a convertor between, say, a procedural and object-oriented language, but the end result is going to be object-oriented in name only, so why bother?
It would be more useful to provide clear and simple interface to make using existing libraries from the new language as easy as possible.
How is that bizarre? Terrorism doesn't threaten the rich and the powerful - if anything, it works in their favour by presenting a fearsome but ultimately powerless boogeyman to act as an excuse for depriving everyone else of freedom in the name of "security" - while communism does.
You are absolutely right. And that's why we have modern technology and, in fact, physics themselves: because people began verifying obvious "facts".
Except for water power, where a dam bursting can kill hundreds of thousands and wipe out cities. Or wind power, where no wind means no electricity. Or geothermal, where the water used for heat transport dissolves all kinds of interesting chemicals from deep down and spreads them into groundwater should containment fail. Or fossil fuels, the use of which alters the climate of the entire planet in an uncontrollable fashion.
But after hydro, wind, geothermal and fossils, nuclear is clearly the most dangerous energy source.
Unfortunately, what's best for the Japanese people seems to be something else than what the Japanese people want. Which gets us back to my point: either the Japanese government can go against the will of its people, in which case it can also do so when it does not have their best interests at heart, or it can't, in which case the people will get their less-than-optimal way in this matter.
It is impossible to have a government that can ignore the will of its people only when they happen to be wrong.
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain.
Because I, for one, do not want a continuous record of my activity level to be available to doctors, law enforcement, insurance firms or any other entity.
A more cynical person might wonder if this is one of the very reasons cannabis is opposed. We live in a use-and-throw-away -society where economic output is the beginning and end of everything, and you just know that some beancounter somewhere has calculated how much we'd save if retirees lived a year or two less.
So that is what the Antikythera Mechanism was used for!
Actually, Velocity += Scalar * MassOfOtherObject / Distance^2.
Actually, wouldn't you want to alternate very heat-conductive layers with insulating ones? Heat-conducting layers blur the thermal image, and the heat insulating ones dim it.
Also, you'd want a ground-based heat pump to mask the amount of total heat.
It is, however, unreasonable to expect the government to listen to you but ignore others. Either the citizens have power over their government or they don't.
Well... no. Chernobyl is turning into a forest right now. It may or may not be a healthy place to live, but it's not Mordor. And of course Hiroshima and Nagasaki, two cities hit with an actual nuclear weapon, have long since recovered.
Nuclear industry needs to be regulated - or better yet, the plants need to be owned and operated by the government rather than for-profit companies - but a plant that blows up is simply an industrial accident like any other, nothing less, nothing more.
Dunno what would count as "huge", but 33% would count as "adequate" since that's what a country that got 33% of its electricity from nuclear power would need to cut to make do without those power plants.
You sound like an astroturfer trying to set up a strawman.
The context of this discussion is the grandparent's assertion that people will only "go out on a limb" if they have a leader willing to show an example, and your answer that Warren Buffet paying at least as much taxes as his secretary might provide this. It does not, for the simple reason that Warren Buffet can still afford everything he could before (everything he wants) after paying a secretary's tax, and this fact is obvious to everyone. This, in turn, makes you bringing him up pretty strange, unless of course you're paid to do so as part of a PR campaign (or are really this much out of touch with reality).
You can certainly spout any absurdities you want, it's a free country after all. It still doesn't make a billionaire hypothethically paying as much rather than less taxes as a secretary a sacrifice in any meaningful way, and certainly doesn't make him an inspiration to others.
I would too, if that was actually possible. Unfortunately it isn't. Nobody sells e-goods, they're "licensed", which means that I may use them as long as the publisher lets me in ways they like (which they may change at any time they like), or as long as the publisher or some unrelated third party who happens to own them at the time doesn't mismanage its finances and disappear. Assuming, of course, that some other entity doesn't assert that they own the e-good instead, in which case it gets un-published and disappears like it never was.
But yeah, it would sure be nice to be able to buy e-books.
A real sacrifice means a sacrifice you'll notice without the help of a team of accountants. It means that you can't afford a big-screen TV, car or food, not that you have mere 50 rather than 60 billions in the bank.
Ouch.
Well, that and the fact that Google actually provides useful services, such as searching and e-mail.
Come out of copyright? Nothing has come out of copyright since Mickey Mouse was created; nothing ever will again.
Luckily, in the age of Pirate Bay, that matters less than it used to; unfortunately, in the age of ubiquitous personal (super)computers, it matters a lot more than it used to.
The issue isn't about putting idiots in charge, the issue is about making it easy for the idiots to hold those in charge accountable for their actions.
Also, every time you exclude a group from voting, you make it easier to exclude another group. Yesterday it was felons, today it's idiots, tomorrow it'll be your turn.
And those are conflicting goals. If you can check who your vote went to, your boss can look over your shoulder as you do.
Isn't the whole idea behind having multiple different up- and downmods precisely to express this? Besides, if every troll post is guaranteed to generate at least one visible message, stating it was a troll, the end result will be quite a bit of noise.
How can the great-grandson of a medieval Italian nobleman be a native american?
All currency is imaginary. It's an abstract representation of wealth, which in turn is an abstract representation of resources and services owed to you. And of course the entire concept of owing - debt - is a purely social construct, and thus imaginary.
But yeah, wealth is not safe.
Hear hear. The real value of Internet is that all the stories, art etc. that people create and used to hide in their desk drawers is now available online. Sturgeon's law still holds, of course, but so does the law of lots of monkeys on typewriters. Commercial content is just a nice bonus.