As the owner of an HP calc, I have to say that what you say is not really the problem. The problem is and was inertia in the way math is taught. This inertia has led to "one way or the highway" with recommendation by HS math teachers everywhere for the TI-30 and its descendants.
Couple that with the *much* lower price point of the TI-30 compared to the HP "equivalent" (the 10 and the 15), the choice for a HS student to pick the TI-30 style calc is a no-brainer. The love affair with TI then extends into higher education.
Thus, millions of people never *ever* consider RPN. It has led to a stranglehold on the academic market by TI over the decades.
It took me to be out of school to even think of going to HP.
Personally, I won't go back to algebraic calcs. I even use a HP48 simulator on my desktop instead of the regular calculators that come with Gnome, KDE, or Windows.
HP has come up with algebraic calcs over the years. They are always inferior.
No, it probably means that most people think procedurally instead of functionally. And while that's just a guess, I'd be willing to bet a case of beer on it.
It also probably means that most everyday problems are procedural/imperative. I'd be willing to bet a case of beer on that, too.
The beatings in academia that people get over the head with functional programming turns off a lot of people. Emphasis on functional programming in academia seems like mental masturbation instead of getting shit done. Kinda like what goes on between pure and applied science and math factions.
"Lisp is superior to everything" - oh hell no. That's like saying a hammer is superior to a screwdriver.
There is space in the toolbox for all kinds of tools. Not everything is a nail. If a problem can be solved easier in a procedural/imperative language, then use that. Similarly, if a problem can be solved easier in a functional language, by all means, use Lisp.
But don't tie your brain in knots trying to fit the problem (or the way you think) into the language.
10 INPUT "Who is poster?";A$ 20 IF A$="plover" PRINT $A;" is a jerk" else 30 30 PRINT A$;" is not a jerk"
There are literally millions of programmers that cut their teeth on little 16K machines with basic in ROM. It stopped nobody from going on to OO languages. Dykstra was wrong.
When I was a poor teen, we didn't have money for software. Most stuff was acquired through erm.. clubs, and copied from school or work.
And $300 is still a chunk of change if you're a college student trying to meet rent on a part time job. It may be more than fair, but still, you don't see Adobe making it impossible to pirate their stuff, which they are more than capable of doing.
Because every poor teenager/student they deny copyright infringement to is a lost customer after college graduation.
The only real argument I have left with piracy is that it distorts the market. This is especially seen in the software market - where the incumbent publishers get undeserved market share through piracy - locking out alternatives. Repeat offenders giving piracy the wink-wink-nudg-nudge would be Microsoft, Adobe, and Autodesk. How else would they build their userbase if they made it impossible for HS and college students to pirate full editions?
I know a lot of pirates too. It's laughable how the studios and publishers come up with the "lost profits" that are pulled out of thin air because they assume that every pirated copy would be a bought copy.
Good lord, looking at this make me think they deliberately tortured me in English classes between 9'th and 12'th grade.
- Two term papers each grade. Worth 20 or 30 percent of your final grade (could not remember which).
- Grammar errors -1 point each in term papers.
- Spelling errors -2 points each in term papers.
- It was possible to get a negative score on a term paper.
- All had to be typed. I typed at the paltry rate of 20wpm even after taking a typing class.
- One could not "graduate" 9'th grade English without passing the spelling exam.
- There was also a 7'th grade spelling test that was taken before HS.
And you know what? Even though I hated it, it was worth it. The only problem with this was that it was all about function and not content. Emphasis on creative writing and actual communication of one's thoughts was next to nothing. It took me 5 years of Fight-O-Net and local BBS networks to figure out how to connect my brain with my fingertips and actually enjoy writing.
but there's no getting around the fact that there are some people that just hate gays.
Then they should STFU, GTFO, and do something else.
There have been gays in uniform that were openly gay in Afghanistan since the first day of invasion - they're NATO troops from other countries like Canada. Do you think an American lieutenant would take shit from a lance corporal that didn't want to go on patrol with "that faggot from Holland"? Really? You think that would fly?
Sure. There are people who would have problems with it. There were also people who had problems with blacks being integrated and women in uniform. If they couldn't do their jobs because of bigotry, then they got kicked out, deservedly so. Truman certainly didn't put up with any BS once he signed the executive order.
DADT was a complete failure. It endorsed discrimination and enabled witch hunts - the exact opposite of its initial rationale.
You mean like the spectacularly bad cost/benefit ratio that we have in this country - that we pay *twice* as much as any other nation per capita and *still* come in just north of 40'th plac? (at last check it was 37'th, but that was last year. close enough)
Please, tell me how fucking good it is here. Tell me how fucking good it was when my employer does the insurance company two-step every fucking year.
Tell me how fucking good it is when I have to call up to find out if I'm covered out of network for something.
We have death panels. They're called insurance companies.
No, you _stole_ the lawnmower. Taking without permission is theft, whether I am there to see it or not.
If you're my buddy and you take my car out for a ride, without telling me, and you get stopped, and the cops call me up to ask if you had permission (since you know me) I would well be within my rights to tell them "no, he stole it" and away you go. I may be an asshole, but you stole the car.
But in your example, not only do you steal my fucking lawnmower, you use it to commit fraud upon the fucking bank. Considering how bogus loans brought down the economic house of cards, I hope they throw the book at you and put you away for 20 years.
Conversion is theft. Even though it's theft by another name doesn't make it any less than a theft. It's like how a half truth is really a lie.
And two half truths do not make a whole truth, or a whole lie. They are two lies. They multiply instead of add.
It was an almost troll. I'm kinda bitchy these days about how I turn on PRI's "Living on Earth" and how everything is tied to global warming somehow, no matter how tenuous the link. And NPR+PRI are supposed to be the smarter end of the spectrum of mainstream media. It's no wonder that the public in the US thinks that most of climate change science is a lot of "sky is falling" chicken-little fear mongering if that's the best US media has to offer.
BBC programs are much more sane, but we don't get them much on this side of the pond.
Theft by conversion *does* deprive the owner of his own property.
Because for the conversion to take place *someone else* must have possession of that property.
For example:
SCO sells licenses for SCO Unix. They do this on behalf of Novell. They are to remit 100 percent of the fee to Novell, and Novell is to give them 5 percent as the seller's fee. SCO proceeds to hold on to every fucking license fee, including the ridiculous ones they sold to Microsoft and Sun. SCO holds on to these through bankruptcy. Using the money to fund its lawsuits and operating expenses.
Ergo, theft by conversion. Novell is out the money it rightly deserves. It has been *deprived of ownership* by SCO.
conversion n. a civil wrong (tort) in which one converts another's property to his/her own use, which is a fancy way of saying "steals." Conversion includes treating another's goods as one's own, holding onto such property which accidentally comes into the convertor's (taker's) hands, or purposely giving the impression the assets belong to him/her. This gives the true owner the right to sue for his/her own property or the value and loss of use of it, as well as going to law enforcement authorities since conversion usually includes the crime of theft. See also: theft
You took what I said and ran down the street with it and did something stupid with it.
You straw-manned the argument You reductio ad absurdumed the argument.
Stop it.
I never said those things, and the argument was whether someone would look up a definition on the interbutt or other information. Not what is already stored in jurors' heads.
What is stored in jurors' heads is why we have juries instead of checklists or computers to define guilt.
And definitions and other matters of law should be handled by the attorneys during argument, examination, and cross examination. If the attorneys did not get the correct definitions, then shame on them.
But in no way should that justify Juror #8 tweeting for help on a definition or law. No. No way, no how. Like you said, that's what the court is there for. Advocating for jury independent investigation is advocating for chaos in court.
There is the legal definition of a term and there is the colloquial definition of a term. One is found in a legal dictionary and in the law itself. The latter is in normal dictionaries.
So let's put it this way...
You are on trial for premeditated murder. A juror looks up a word that has a legal definition as defined in the statute and an "ordinary" definition. The legal definition sends you to jail for a few years because you're actually guilty of manslaughter and not premeditated murder (if the prosecutor didn't give the option of manslaughter you go free). The "ordinary" "Webster's" definition is broad enough to send you to Death Row.
What would you rather have, a refereed trial insulated as much as possible from outside bias or one where a juror can just go make up his own decision on stuff not introduced as evidence?
The juror looks up the "Webster's" definition, tells the other jurors about it. You are found guilty. You die.
If you can't grok this, you're too dangerous to serve on a jury.
People like you don't matter to the magazine publishers. Indeed, magazine publishers could do just fine without the newsstand vending because that's not where the bulk of their subscribers come from. The only thing newsstand vending does for them, really, is get new subscribers to sell ads for.
Indeed, the vast bulk of the money they make is from advertisers, not from the subscriptions. The subscriptions are gravy.
So yes, this is a very big deal for them to not get demographics. Without it, you'd see Newsweek, Time, etc., at 8 bucks/week to make up for the advertising loss.
Slashdot Mirror
As the owner of an HP calc, I have to say that what you say is not really the problem. The problem is and was inertia in the way math is taught. This inertia has led to "one way or the highway" with recommendation by HS math teachers everywhere for the TI-30 and its descendants.
Couple that with the *much* lower price point of the TI-30 compared to the HP "equivalent" (the 10 and the 15), the choice for a HS student to pick the TI-30 style calc is a no-brainer. The love affair with TI then extends into higher education.
Thus, millions of people never *ever* consider RPN. It has led to a stranglehold on the academic market by TI over the decades.
It took me to be out of school to even think of going to HP.
Personally, I won't go back to algebraic calcs. I even use a HP48 simulator on my desktop instead of the regular calculators that come with Gnome, KDE, or Windows.
HP has come up with algebraic calcs over the years. They are always inferior.
YMMV.
--
BMO
No, it probably means that most people think procedurally instead of functionally. And while that's just a guess, I'd be willing to bet a case of beer on it.
It also probably means that most everyday problems are procedural/imperative. I'd be willing to bet a case of beer on that, too.
The beatings in academia that people get over the head with functional programming turns off a lot of people. Emphasis on functional programming in academia seems like mental masturbation instead of getting shit done. Kinda like what goes on between pure and applied science and math factions.
"Lisp is superior to everything" - oh hell no. That's like saying a hammer is superior to a screwdriver.
There is space in the toolbox for all kinds of tools. Not everything is a nail. If a problem can be solved easier in a procedural/imperative language, then use that. Similarly, if a problem can be solved easier in a functional language, by all means, use Lisp.
But don't tie your brain in knots trying to fit the problem (or the way you think) into the language.
That's just stupid and masochistic.
--
BMO
10 INPUT "Who is poster?";A$
20 IF A$="plover" PRINT $A;" is a jerk" else 30
30 PRINT A$;" is not a jerk"
There are literally millions of programmers that cut their teeth on little 16K machines with basic in ROM. It stopped nobody from going on to OO languages. Dykstra was wrong.
--
BMO
When I was a poor teen, we didn't have money for software. Most stuff was acquired through erm.. clubs, and copied from school or work.
And $300 is still a chunk of change if you're a college student trying to meet rent on a part time job. It may be more than fair, but still, you don't see Adobe making it impossible to pirate their stuff, which they are more than capable of doing.
Because every poor teenager/student they deny copyright infringement to is a lost customer after college graduation.
--
BMO
" that only leaves office, which does have a low-cost student edition. Which is still expensive for a student, but not ridiculously so."
Microsoft just recently dumped OGA. Guess why.
--
BMO
This. I don't begrudge anyone pirating anymore.
The only real argument I have left with piracy is that it distorts the market. This is especially seen in the software market - where the incumbent publishers get undeserved market share through piracy - locking out alternatives. Repeat offenders giving piracy the wink-wink-nudg-nudge would be Microsoft, Adobe, and Autodesk. How else would they build their userbase if they made it impossible for HS and college students to pirate full editions?
I know a lot of pirates too. It's laughable how the studios and publishers come up with the "lost profits" that are pulled out of thin air because they assume that every pirated copy would be a bought copy.
My sympathy is gone.
--
BMO
And to top it off, I flubbed the title.
Derp.
--
BMO
Good lord, looking at this make me think they deliberately tortured me in English classes between 9'th and 12'th grade.
- Two term papers each grade. Worth 20 or 30 percent of your final grade (could not remember which).
- Grammar errors -1 point each in term papers.
- Spelling errors -2 points each in term papers.
- It was possible to get a negative score on a term paper.
- All had to be typed. I typed at the paltry rate of 20wpm even after taking a typing class.
- One could not "graduate" 9'th grade English without passing the spelling exam.
- There was also a 7'th grade spelling test that was taken before HS.
And you know what? Even though I hated it, it was worth it. The only problem with this was that it was all about function and not content. Emphasis on creative writing and actual communication of one's thoughts was next to nothing. It took me 5 years of Fight-O-Net and local BBS networks to figure out how to connect my brain with my fingertips and actually enjoy writing.
--
BMO
but there's no getting around the fact that there are some people that just hate gays.
Then they should STFU, GTFO, and do something else.
There have been gays in uniform that were openly gay in Afghanistan since the first day of invasion - they're NATO troops from other countries like Canada. Do you think an American lieutenant would take shit from a lance corporal that didn't want to go on patrol with "that faggot from Holland"? Really? You think that would fly?
Sure. There are people who would have problems with it. There were also people who had problems with blacks being integrated and women in uniform. If they couldn't do their jobs because of bigotry, then they got kicked out, deservedly so. Truman certainly didn't put up with any BS once he signed the executive order.
DADT was a complete failure. It endorsed discrimination and enabled witch hunts - the exact opposite of its initial rationale.
--
BMO
The stupid is strong with you.
Alan Turing wasn't some random gay person "working with technology." He fucking invented it.
Douchebag.
--
BMO
you want universally bad health care for everyone
You mean like the spectacularly bad cost/benefit ratio that we have in this country - that we pay *twice* as much as any other nation per capita and *still* come in just north of 40'th plac? (at last check it was 37'th, but that was last year. close enough)
Please, tell me how fucking good it is here. Tell me how fucking good it was when my employer does the insurance company two-step every fucking year.
Tell me how fucking good it is when I have to call up to find out if I'm covered out of network for something.
We have death panels. They're called insurance companies.
People like you have no fucking clue.
--
BMO
No, you let me barrow your lawnmower as has been a long standing arrangement in which you allowed me to use it whenever I needed
Facts not in evidence from the previous message.
I am not going to play Calvinball with you.
--
BMO
Not for nothing, but Expat Shield's privacy policy "taketh away in the small print what the big print giveth" as far as privacy goes.
You are free to disagree, but really, compare the front page claims with the privacy policy.
Bu
--t the offer of help is appreciated. TY for trying.
I'm not that hard up. I've gotten around the "you're not from around here, are you?" BBC ip filtering by torrenting.
--
BMO
No, you _stole_ the lawnmower. Taking without permission is theft, whether I am there to see it or not.
If you're my buddy and you take my car out for a ride, without telling me, and you get stopped, and the cops call me up to ask if you had permission (since you know me) I would well be within my rights to tell them "no, he stole it" and away you go. I may be an asshole, but you stole the car.
But in your example, not only do you steal my fucking lawnmower, you use it to commit fraud upon the fucking bank. Considering how bogus loans brought down the economic house of cards, I hope they throw the book at you and put you away for 20 years.
Conversion is theft. Even though it's theft by another name doesn't make it any less than a theft. It's like how a half truth is really a lie.
And two half truths do not make a whole truth, or a whole lie. They are two lies. They multiply instead of add.
--
BMO
It was an almost troll. I'm kinda bitchy these days about how I turn on PRI's "Living on Earth" and how everything is tied to global warming somehow, no matter how tenuous the link. And NPR+PRI are supposed to be the smarter end of the spectrum of mainstream media. It's no wonder that the public in the US thinks that most of climate change science is a lot of "sky is falling" chicken-little fear mongering if that's the best US media has to offer.
BBC programs are much more sane, but we don't get them much on this side of the pond.
--
BMO
Theft by conversion *does* deprive the owner of his own property.
Because for the conversion to take place *someone else* must have possession of that property.
For example:
SCO sells licenses for SCO Unix. They do this on behalf of Novell.
They are to remit 100 percent of the fee to Novell, and Novell is to give them 5 percent as the seller's fee.
SCO proceeds to hold on to every fucking license fee, including the ridiculous ones they sold to Microsoft and Sun.
SCO holds on to these through bankruptcy. Using the money to fund its lawsuits and operating expenses.
Ergo, theft by conversion. Novell is out the money it rightly deserves. It has been *deprived of ownership* by SCO.
http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=346
conversion
n. a civil wrong (tort) in which one converts another's property to his/her own use, which is a fancy way of saying "steals." Conversion includes treating another's goods as one's own, holding onto such property which accidentally comes into the convertor's (taker's) hands, or purposely giving the impression the assets belong to him/her. This gives the true owner the right to sue for his/her own property or the value and loss of use of it, as well as going to law enforcement authorities since conversion usually includes the crime of theft.
See also: theft
--
BMO
because of global warming.
--
BMO
You took what I said and ran down the street with it and did something stupid with it.
You straw-manned the argument
You reductio ad absurdumed the argument.
Stop it.
I never said those things, and the argument was whether someone would look up a definition on the interbutt or other information. Not what is already stored in jurors' heads.
What is stored in jurors' heads is why we have juries instead of checklists or computers to define guilt.
And definitions and other matters of law should be handled by the attorneys during argument, examination, and cross examination. If the attorneys did not get the correct definitions, then shame on them.
But in no way should that justify Juror #8 tweeting for help on a definition or law. No. No way, no how. Like you said, that's what the court is there for. Advocating for jury independent investigation is advocating for chaos in court.
--
BMO
There is the legal definition of a term and there is the colloquial definition of a term. One is found in a legal dictionary and in the law itself. The latter is in normal dictionaries.
So let's put it this way...
You are on trial for premeditated murder. A juror looks up a word that has a legal definition as defined in the statute and an "ordinary" definition. The legal definition sends you to jail for a few years because you're actually guilty of manslaughter and not premeditated murder (if the prosecutor didn't give the option of manslaughter you go free). The "ordinary" "Webster's" definition is broad enough to send you to Death Row.
What would you rather have, a refereed trial insulated as much as possible from outside bias or one where a juror can just go make up his own decision on stuff not introduced as evidence?
The juror looks up the "Webster's" definition, tells the other jurors about it. You are found guilty. You die.
If you can't grok this, you're too dangerous to serve on a jury.
--
BMO
Uhm....
There are "clones" out there already.
They're called Identical Twins.
I'm sure you can agree with me that one twin is not the same person as the other.
--
BMO
Mein furher! I can walk! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9ihKq34Ozc
--
BMO
That would be McCain.
The Tea Potty has its hand so far up McCain's (and other Republicans') backside you can see the fingertips in his mouth as he speaks.
--
BMO
Now you've fucking done it. Don't you know that he's got a cluster of Crays grepping every newsgroup for mention of his name?
Now he's going to troll this froup from here to next week.
--
BMO
If they test it on him, it might actually work. Darker colours absorb more heat.
--
BMO - Disaffected progressive
BRB - SOME BLOKES ON THE LANDING SAYING THEY ARE SECRET SERVICE AND THEY WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO ME.
People like you don't matter to the magazine publishers. Indeed, magazine publishers could do just fine without the newsstand vending because that's not where the bulk of their subscribers come from. The only thing newsstand vending does for them, really, is get new subscribers to sell ads for.
Indeed, the vast bulk of the money they make is from advertisers, not from the subscriptions. The subscriptions are gravy.
So yes, this is a very big deal for them to not get demographics. Without it, you'd see Newsweek, Time, etc., at 8 bucks/week to make up for the advertising loss.
--
BMO