The problem with what you're saying is simply this: it becomes a subjective decision for someone whether what you did is stupid or not. At that point, all hope of fairness are basically lost.
And what drug are you on, exactly?? The drug war does NOT help the addict what so ever. The drug war helps maintain the government as the top dealer of all drugs.
The same can be said for GNU/Linux though. I would even wager that the signal to noise ratio there is even greater, and yet, somehow, there's order in the chaos.
Not like you know any better anyway. According to what you claim are your beliefs, if you are already in the process of being judged, then you are saved, by definition. The judgment isn't to decide if you're going to heaven or hell. The judgment is to decide your position of servitude in heaven. The sinners get the scraps, so to speak.
I live in Barrie. It's 120,000 people, but probably much more at this point. It's expanding rather rapidly. It is my suspicion that most of the other little towns that have been mentioned will eventually be swallowed up by Barrie (Already happening).
Bad bad bad analogy! Should you actually pull the trigger, you will loose all of your held power over that person. It's always a bluff, and if it isn't, the end result is still not the desired result.
Except that plants and bacteria actually do "absorb" DNA. While not exactly the correct technical term, plants do not always have to be cross bred to obtain genetic material. In fact, plants (and bacteria) are capable of transferring their genes across different species. Oh, I'm fairly sure that this isn't limited to only plants and bacteria either.
Buddy, He may lack a sense of proportion, but then again, the event in of itself will pretty much guarantee this type of a response. Especially when he's used to having to be the victim most, if not all of the time.
A state of mind I know all too well, unfortunately. See, being 5'3" will sometimes even give rent'a'cops the go ahead and drag me out of the building rather than a simple tap on the shoulder. In that specific case I was complaining, a little too loudly, and that was the extent of my actions... a complaint. I wasn't a victim because I was approached, I was a victim because the actions on his part were over kill. He only did what he did because he assessed he could get away with using physical force on me. I admit that I've thanked whatever deity for not having enough training to stop him, because if I had, and the way he actually grabbed me would probably incite a rather violent and probably a very damaging response. He completely surprised me... I know if i had the conditioning that this would probably result in his hand being broken.
Like the GP, I too am very willing to type and tell this story, and would probably want to elaborate as much as I could. It's the passion of the matter. Do not dismiss him so easily for he is just excited by a small and rare taste of personal justice.
Why start the loosing battle to begin with? That's what makes him a coward. He talked shit, and is now running with his tail between his legs. The very definition of Coward.
(replying to self to add one more comment) To anyone familiar with RTS, I'm thinking along the same lines. You must shift your priorities and plans constantly to compensate for the reality of the situation. The problem of course, is that we are so good at making static plans that it flies right in the face of our own intuition, not to mention that we like our reality to stay as static as possible.
Some people value freedom, others value health, others value economic prosperity, others value comfort and leisure.
While this is true, not all values are "created equal." For instance, it is perfectly fine to value comfort and leisure, but it becomes increasingly difficult to attain if you ignore economic prosperity, health and freedom. Because of this I think it is perfectly reasonable to conclude that people who would value comfort and leisure only, would not be taking a very logical position.
Ultimately, this is a question about balancing and prioritizing.
Just because people are disagreeing, does not mean there isn't in fact one best solution to the problem.
I think the quote itself is actually wrong, it should have been stated as: "Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, receive neither liberty nor safety."
I'm not sure if the deliberately crippled file formats are Ubuntu's responsibility. If anything, this unnecessary burden had been placed on us all by Microsoft. Why do you not blame the source of the problem? Why do you blame what basically amounts to being the victim of these actions? Are the waters really that muddy?
Is it really that difficult to understand that the environment, given the legal landscape as it is, guarantees failure for topics such as closed file formats, closed drivers, and closed code in general?
The very fact that the legal system is involved is in telling developers what they can and cannot write and use is quite telling of just how badly we failed as a society to keep one of our most invaluable assets, freedom.
If you have 20 translation units that instantiate a template with one set of types, you have to recompile all 20 to get the new definition, even if they do end up merged at link time. And if you instantiate it with more than one set of types, those can't be merged at all. Finally, compiler diagnostic messages involving deeply nested template types can prove counterintuitive for the programmer to interpret: "What the fuck are char traits?"
Realize please that where an instantiation is placed isn't defined by C++. An implementation is free to make it work just as you described, however, that is not the only way that this is done. Of course a template instantiated with a different parameter will yield a completely seperate class, it's supposed to be a distinct type (unlike say, Java), I don't think this classifies as an issue because it's that way by design. Finally, the template error messages are actually like a stack trace. You are effectively running a program during compilation, should that program run deep, then you shouldn't be surprised by a deep trace. This may very well be a language issue, but not one with a clear solution, since the solution can't undermine the purpose of the feature in the first place. In my own mind I feel that something like exception handling during compile time may help here, but this is just a very uneducated guess.
Slashdot Mirror
woosh
Axe to grind?
Or worse... YOU walk in and recognize that it's HER shoes while SHE's raging on the toilet with PBR beer shits at 150psi.
The problem with what you're saying is simply this: it becomes a subjective decision for someone whether what you did is stupid or not. At that point, all hope of fairness are basically lost.
And what drug are you on, exactly?? The drug war does NOT help the addict what so ever. The drug war helps maintain the government as the top dealer of all drugs.
Doesn't seem to be, because in this case a PDF is just and example of ONE vector of attack. This is quite a bit deeper in the system, the kernel.
It was an obvious troll.
The same can be said for GNU/Linux though. I would even wager that the signal to noise ratio there is even greater, and yet, somehow, there's order in the chaos.
Bah, I still call it a village. After living in Europe... It's just not possible to call it otherwise.
Not like you know any better anyway. According to what you claim are your beliefs, if you are already in the process of being judged, then you are saved, by definition. The judgment isn't to decide if you're going to heaven or hell. The judgment is to decide your position of servitude in heaven. The sinners get the scraps, so to speak.
I live in Barrie. It's 120,000 people, but probably much more at this point. It's expanding rather rapidly. It is my suspicion that most of the other little towns that have been mentioned will eventually be swallowed up by Barrie (Already happening).
Against cowards. Oh who am I kidding, the world is riddled with them.
Bad bad bad analogy! Should you actually pull the trigger, you will loose all of your held power over that person. It's always a bluff, and if it isn't, the end result is still not the desired result.
Except that plants and bacteria actually do "absorb" DNA. While not exactly the correct technical term, plants do not always have to be cross bred to obtain genetic material. In fact, plants (and bacteria) are capable of transferring their genes across different species. Oh, I'm fairly sure that this isn't limited to only plants and bacteria either.
Buddy, He may lack a sense of proportion, but then again, the event in of itself will pretty much guarantee this type of a response. Especially when he's used to having to be the victim most, if not all of the time.
A state of mind I know all too well, unfortunately. See, being 5'3" will sometimes even give rent'a'cops the go ahead and drag me out of the building rather than a simple tap on the shoulder. In that specific case I was complaining, a little too loudly, and that was the extent of my actions... a complaint. I wasn't a victim because I was approached, I was a victim because the actions on his part were over kill. He only did what he did because he assessed he could get away with using physical force on me. I admit that I've thanked whatever deity for not having enough training to stop him, because if I had, and the way he actually grabbed me would probably incite a rather violent and probably a very damaging response. He completely surprised me... I know if i had the conditioning that this would probably result in his hand being broken.
Like the GP, I too am very willing to type and tell this story, and would probably want to elaborate as much as I could. It's the passion of the matter. Do not dismiss him so easily for he is just excited by a small and rare taste of personal justice.
Unfortunately, yes.
Evidence?
Why start the loosing battle to begin with? That's what makes him a coward. He talked shit, and is now running with his tail between his legs. The very definition of Coward.
(replying to self to add one more comment) To anyone familiar with RTS, I'm thinking along the same lines. You must shift your priorities and plans constantly to compensate for the reality of the situation. The problem of course, is that we are so good at making static plans that it flies right in the face of our own intuition, not to mention that we like our reality to stay as static as possible.
While this is true, not all values are "created equal." For instance, it is perfectly fine to value comfort and leisure, but it becomes increasingly difficult to attain if you ignore economic prosperity, health and freedom. Because of this I think it is perfectly reasonable to conclude that people who would value comfort and leisure only, would not be taking a very logical position.
Ultimately, this is a question about balancing and prioritizing.
Just because people are disagreeing, does not mean there isn't in fact one best solution to the problem.
Its called "The Slums"
I recall that it was their spine that showed a distinct curvature.
I think the quote itself is actually wrong, it should have been stated as: "Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, receive neither liberty nor safety."
I'm not sure if the deliberately crippled file formats are Ubuntu's responsibility. If anything, this unnecessary burden had been placed on us all by Microsoft. Why do you not blame the source of the problem? Why do you blame what basically amounts to being the victim of these actions? Are the waters really that muddy?
Is it really that difficult to understand that the environment, given the legal landscape as it is, guarantees failure for topics such as closed file formats, closed drivers, and closed code in general?
The very fact that the legal system is involved is in telling developers what they can and cannot write and use is quite telling of just how badly we failed as a society to keep one of our most invaluable assets, freedom.
If you have 20 translation units that instantiate a template with one set of types, you have to recompile all 20 to get the new definition, even if they do end up merged at link time. And if you instantiate it with more than one set of types, those can't be merged at all. Finally, compiler diagnostic messages involving deeply nested template types can prove counterintuitive for the programmer to interpret: "What the fuck are char traits?"
Realize please that where an instantiation is placed isn't defined by C++. An implementation is free to make it work just as you described, however, that is not the only way that this is done. Of course a template instantiated with a different parameter will yield a completely seperate class, it's supposed to be a distinct type (unlike say, Java), I don't think this classifies as an issue because it's that way by design. Finally, the template error messages are actually like a stack trace. You are effectively running a program during compilation, should that program run deep, then you shouldn't be surprised by a deep trace. This may very well be a language issue, but not one with a clear solution, since the solution can't undermine the purpose of the feature in the first place. In my own mind I feel that something like exception handling during compile time may help here, but this is just a very uneducated guess.
Miss: X = GUI
Assuming something is what it isn't will surely give you wrong impressions. X is NOT by ANY means a GUI. Try again.