I think he's talking about the fact that you can claim your spouse as a dependent.
That being said... if you earn enough, you run into the marriage penalty. That is, someone making a little over 400k by themselves will pay the same tax rate as two people making a little over 400k together rather than 800k as one would expect.
Are those feelings or do you have data to back that sentiment up? Yes the Java jre has a few ethical problems (I'm looking at you, planned yahoo toolbar), however, the language itself isn't bad. It has one of the most mature development communities out there. With the addition of Streams and Lambdas, I think it's finally hit a nice balance between complexity and features.
I'd be sold on PS4 if it had BC with PS3. There isn't enough content that I like for me to want to get the PS4 yet, but I wouldn't mind upgrading if it had backwards compatibility.
I was going to post the same thing. As a Dad, I look forward to playing all new Super Mario World levels! The real question is whether or not it is possible to remake all of the old levels...
You're just an AC so I won't go into too much detail, but I have every Amiibo, and a 1TB HD attached to my Wii U with just about every AAA game worth playing. I'm a very reliable buyer. I'm just a bit pickier than the kind a guy who settles for a CoD game.
No, I'm the kind of guy who wants everyone to be great by thinking creatively on how to simplify complexity. Steve Jobs said it best, "That's been one of my mantras - focus and simplicity. Simple can be harder than complex: You have to work hard to get your thinking clean to make it simple. But it's worth it in the end because once you get there, you can move mountains."
I want more people gaming without dumbing down gaming into what we see on mobile devices. This doesn't take away from l33t hard core brogamerz. Less creative people, on the other hand, seem to want a world of Pro Halo and Candy Crush Saga. They cannot wrap their mind around how to make something deep and simple. Simple doesn't mean cheap or easy; but elegant.
A great example would be Sonic the Hedgehog 3 vs. whatever junk passes for a Sonic game today. In Sonic 3, you have one button and directional pad to do a vast variety of tasks. I could duck, move, look up, jump, fly, glide, electric jump, flame dash, spin dash, bubble jump, change into Super Sonic, insta shield, etc... One button and a directional pad. It all made sense and require no tutorials. Not true today. Every single button on a controller has to be used because game developers are not creative enough to do otherwise.
If you're into Rube Goldberg machines, then more power to you. But if you want to win the market and please users, be more creative and figure out how to tame complexity.
Except it further dissuades me from buying their games. Why would I want to play a game online that I'm going to lose all the time? I don't have 60 hours a week to hone my brogaming skillz. Having these complex controllers puts "pro" players at an even greater advantage while not addressing the issues of complexity. This makes me not want to play.
Splatoon changes the equation by making a game accessible and pairs you with random people of different skill levels while taking away anti-features like "get shouted at with obscenities by 10 year olds" mode. It makes me want to play.
As engineers, let's look at Nintendo for inspiration in designing everything from end user products to software APIs. Let's stay away from the idea of being complex just to be l33t.
I understand this controller isn't meant for casual players, but I think this is an example of choosing complexity over usability. If I'm trying to get more gamers to play Xbox One, I would invest in technologies that will allow normal players to enjoy a game as much as pro players rather than invest in technologies that widens the gap between pro players and normal players. There are far more normal gamers than "pro" gamers.
Take Splatoon for instance. It took a genre that is reserved for hardcore brogamers and made it accessible and fun for everyone - including brogamers. They didn't do it by making the game complex nor did they do it by making a dumbed down game. Nintendo achieved its goals by encapsulating the complexities of a shooter in a way that is intuitive for everyone. As engineers, that's what we should all be striving for.
It depends. I use Facebook for keeping up with friends, family, and community issues. With Google+ I use it to promote my public professional persona. So it's kinda like a public Facebook with less drama.
Re:hexadecimal floating point numbers?
on
Perl 5.22 Released
·
· Score: 2
And the funniest part of this all, is that exponential notation had to be changed to use p rather than e since e is a hexadecimal number.
Re:hexadecimal floating point numbers?
on
Perl 5.22 Released
·
· Score: 1
That was my thought exactly. I nearly spit out my coffee when I read that wondering if it was some sort of joke.
Kansas Citian here. Where I live, I can select from AT&T, Time Warner, Comcast, and Google. And of course there's a bunch of smaller ISPs that resell bandwidth from the big four.
I know you're joking, but in all seriousness its cultural. She shows me great respect and I'm loving towards her. As such, I admittedly don't experience the same levels of drama that my peers do. So my wife not going crazy was probably a bad example since that's not the norm everywhere.
While I see many challenges to geoengineering, talks breaking down into nuclear war is not one of them. I mean, I have challenging talks with my wife all the time about the budget, but I never think going into it that she's going to burn down the house in response to a dispute.
You are going to pay less for less. If one really needed all of those channels, they should subscribe to a traditional package. To put it in perspective, let's say you use a small jar's worth of mayo each month and mayo expires in 30 days. Should you really buy a 5 gallon container of mayo just because the cost per ounce of mayo is less? Obviously not since most of it would go to waste. Likewise, a guy like me wouldn't want to pay for a bunch of extra channels just to bring the cost per channel down. Instead I'll buy what I want and pay a higher cost per channel, but ultimately pay less.
To drive this home, I actually purchase every season of every current series I watch from Amazon rather than buy cable. It is cheaper for me to buy a season of "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D", "Once Upon a Time", and "Doctor Who" every year rather than pay the cost of a season every month just to watch three shows. Is cable's cost per show cheaper? Yes. But I care more about my total cost.
Nobody has a municipal-enforced monopoly on Internet service.
Sure there is. I used to work for an ISP which had a monopoly in the town I lived because the town enforced that only said ISP could provide service to the town.
I'm guessing that the fact that Google Fiber exists may strengthen their case to go through with the merger. They may argue that Google demonstrates that it is possible for competitors to pop up.
Hopefully if they try such an argument, the Justice Department would be wise enough to realize that the only reason Google Fiber can come to KC is that we don't have municipal enforced monopoly on Internet service. Even before Google, we could choose between AT&T, Time Warner, and Comcast.
And 20 years from now when we are using 8M monitors, someone will dig up this post and giggle. "Remember in 2015 when gweihir said that 8k was overkill! ROTFlyingCar!!!"
I've always disliked this non-answer. Imagine you were in the "Hunger Games" and you won. Someone then asks you, "How did you survive?" You then answer, "If I didn't, I wouldn't be able to answer you." Everyone would agree that this does not answer the question.
Slashdot Mirror
Nothing new here. On Slashdot and Reddit, this seems to be the norm. Anything that the moderator opines as non-factual gets modded down.
I think he's talking about the fact that you can claim your spouse as a dependent.
That being said... if you earn enough, you run into the marriage penalty. That is, someone making a little over 400k by themselves will pay the same tax rate as two people making a little over 400k together rather than 800k as one would expect.
In their FAQ page, I wanted to learn more, so I clicked the provided link and got an ASP.net error page. It's been a long time since I've seen one.
http://worldwidetelescope.org/...
Are those feelings or do you have data to back that sentiment up? Yes the Java jre has a few ethical problems (I'm looking at you, planned yahoo toolbar), however, the language itself isn't bad. It has one of the most mature development communities out there. With the addition of Streams and Lambdas, I think it's finally hit a nice balance between complexity and features.
I'd be sold on PS4 if it had BC with PS3. There isn't enough content that I like for me to want to get the PS4 yet, but I wouldn't mind upgrading if it had backwards compatibility.
I was going to post the same thing. As a Dad, I look forward to playing all new Super Mario World levels! The real question is whether or not it is possible to remake all of the old levels...
You're just an AC so I won't go into too much detail, but I have every Amiibo, and a 1TB HD attached to my Wii U with just about every AAA game worth playing. I'm a very reliable buyer. I'm just a bit pickier than the kind a guy who settles for a CoD game.
No, I'm the kind of guy who wants everyone to be great by thinking creatively on how to simplify complexity. Steve Jobs said it best, "That's been one of my mantras - focus and simplicity. Simple can be harder than complex: You have to work hard to get your thinking clean to make it simple. But it's worth it in the end because once you get there, you can move mountains."
I want more people gaming without dumbing down gaming into what we see on mobile devices. This doesn't take away from l33t hard core brogamerz. Less creative people, on the other hand, seem to want a world of Pro Halo and Candy Crush Saga. They cannot wrap their mind around how to make something deep and simple. Simple doesn't mean cheap or easy; but elegant.
A great example would be Sonic the Hedgehog 3 vs. whatever junk passes for a Sonic game today. In Sonic 3, you have one button and directional pad to do a vast variety of tasks. I could duck, move, look up, jump, fly, glide, electric jump, flame dash, spin dash, bubble jump, change into Super Sonic, insta shield, etc... One button and a directional pad. It all made sense and require no tutorials. Not true today. Every single button on a controller has to be used because game developers are not creative enough to do otherwise.
If you're into Rube Goldberg machines, then more power to you. But if you want to win the market and please users, be more creative and figure out how to tame complexity.
Except it further dissuades me from buying their games. Why would I want to play a game online that I'm going to lose all the time? I don't have 60 hours a week to hone my brogaming skillz. Having these complex controllers puts "pro" players at an even greater advantage while not addressing the issues of complexity. This makes me not want to play.
Splatoon changes the equation by making a game accessible and pairs you with random people of different skill levels while taking away anti-features like "get shouted at with obscenities by 10 year olds" mode. It makes me want to play.
As engineers, let's look at Nintendo for inspiration in designing everything from end user products to software APIs. Let's stay away from the idea of being complex just to be l33t.
I understand this controller isn't meant for casual players, but I think this is an example of choosing complexity over usability. If I'm trying to get more gamers to play Xbox One, I would invest in technologies that will allow normal players to enjoy a game as much as pro players rather than invest in technologies that widens the gap between pro players and normal players. There are far more normal gamers than "pro" gamers.
Take Splatoon for instance. It took a genre that is reserved for hardcore brogamers and made it accessible and fun for everyone - including brogamers. They didn't do it by making the game complex nor did they do it by making a dumbed down game. Nintendo achieved its goals by encapsulating the complexities of a shooter in a way that is intuitive for everyone. As engineers, that's what we should all be striving for.
It depends. I use Facebook for keeping up with friends, family, and community issues. With Google+ I use it to promote my public professional persona. So it's kinda like a public Facebook with less drama.
And the funniest part of this all, is that exponential notation had to be changed to use p rather than e since e is a hexadecimal number.
That was my thought exactly. I nearly spit out my coffee when I read that wondering if it was some sort of joke.
Kansas Citian here. Where I live, I can select from AT&T, Time Warner, Comcast, and Google. And of course there's a bunch of smaller ISPs that resell bandwidth from the big four.
We're talking about Firefox and not Chrome.
I know you're joking, but in all seriousness its cultural. She shows me great respect and I'm loving towards her. As such, I admittedly don't experience the same levels of drama that my peers do. So my wife not going crazy was probably a bad example since that's not the norm everywhere.
While I see many challenges to geoengineering, talks breaking down into nuclear war is not one of them. I mean, I have challenging talks with my wife all the time about the budget, but I never think going into it that she's going to burn down the house in response to a dispute.
You are going to pay less for less. If one really needed all of those channels, they should subscribe to a traditional package. To put it in perspective, let's say you use a small jar's worth of mayo each month and mayo expires in 30 days. Should you really buy a 5 gallon container of mayo just because the cost per ounce of mayo is less? Obviously not since most of it would go to waste. Likewise, a guy like me wouldn't want to pay for a bunch of extra channels just to bring the cost per channel down. Instead I'll buy what I want and pay a higher cost per channel, but ultimately pay less.
To drive this home, I actually purchase every season of every current series I watch from Amazon rather than buy cable. It is cheaper for me to buy a season of "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D", "Once Upon a Time", and "Doctor Who" every year rather than pay the cost of a season every month just to watch three shows. Is cable's cost per show cheaper? Yes. But I care more about my total cost.
Nobody has a municipal-enforced monopoly on Internet service.
Sure there is. I used to work for an ISP which had a monopoly in the town I lived because the town enforced that only said ISP could provide service to the town.
This site says there are 25 providers
So? Your point is?
I'm guessing that the fact that Google Fiber exists may strengthen their case to go through with the merger. They may argue that Google demonstrates that it is possible for competitors to pop up.
Hopefully if they try such an argument, the Justice Department would be wise enough to realize that the only reason Google Fiber can come to KC is that we don't have municipal enforced monopoly on Internet service. Even before Google, we could choose between AT&T, Time Warner, and Comcast.
I interpreted him to mean that California should not be making beer. Not that there shouldn't be beer made in the United States.
I would guess that it would be for bigger monitors. I would love to have a bigger monitor with a higher resolution.
Outside of macs, 8k would look amazing in my theater room. 1080p looks pretty good, but I'm sure 8k at 100" would look stunning.
And 20 years from now when we are using 8M monitors, someone will dig up this post and giggle. "Remember in 2015 when gweihir said that 8k was overkill! ROTFlyingCar!!!"
Or else Nintendo really would have been doomed. Just look at Rare. RIP
I've always disliked this non-answer. Imagine you were in the "Hunger Games" and you won. Someone then asks you, "How did you survive?" You then answer, "If I didn't, I wouldn't be able to answer you." Everyone would agree that this does not answer the question.