Learning programing languages is trivial to a programer. Learning how to use any on to the best advantage can take years, but all you do in those years is memorise more and more library/template procedures and the gotchas of useing them. If you cannot learn both well enough to fool the teacher, then you should not be in CS.
When I took CS the only language course that was required tought 12 langugaes in 10 weeks. It wasn't a big deal, we learned the syntax, and how to do some simple things (a binary tree or simlear) and moved on. Of course we were just told what the "standard library" was called, and told if we really used the language to look it up, because it will save a lot of time.
Come to think of it, other than the one class that covered 12 languages, we wre simply told in class to submit assignments in such and such a language, and if we didn't know it (and the introduction class was tought in Scheme in large part because it was likely we didn't know it!) we were expected to pick it up on our own. In this was I knew 3 of the 12 languages tought in the languages class when I could finially get into it.
In the course description of Cobol there was a warning "CS student may not take Cobol for credit". The same line was in the description of Fortran and C. A CS student should pick up anything that a class on a language can teach on their own. A CS student is expect to spend their time learning data structers, algorithms, and other things that make the different between someone who can bang out a little ugly code when needed, and someone who can take requirement and turn out a maintanable program in as few line as possible.
Amoung the bottom of the barrel equipment makers Sony stands out as amoung the best. Feel better now?
I can't afford a several thousand dollar stereo, and I wouldn't listen to it enough to justify it if I could. When I bought my $3000 stereo I tried every model in the store, and the Sony I bought has better sound than the others at that price point. It is by no means the best stereo out there, but at my budget it is the best, and to most people budget is important.
I'm not sure what the catch/latch is, but they can deactiate it and slide the radio out in 10 seconds. There is no safety problem, they don't come out on their own, yet are easially removeable in seconds when someone wants to remove them.
I've been told that locksmiths varry. Some will take your do not duplicate key, cut a copy. Others will first verify that you have a right to the key, and some will refuse to touch it, perhaps even reporting you to police. Some of those who will duplicate your key will then happily stamp your copy "do not duplicate".
Of course this assumes that key blanks exist, many of the "high security" locks achive that by not making blanks. Home Depot won't not copy your do not duplicate key, but a locksmith is a different story.
One presumes that criminals have their own ways of getting
When I had they key to a fast food restaruant they changed whenever someone who had the key left. Even with the "do not duplicate" stamp and no key blank it is too easy to copy a key. (And fast food doesn't exactly attract the best people, it would be trivial for such people to get the underground scene to copy their key before they turn it in) For much the same reason the safe combo was changed. (Note, the security procedures were better than that, but they recignise that they are not perfect and ask us not to discuss them so I'm only telling the obvious parts)
The tardition at weddings (at least around my area...) is that the couple kisses everytime someone bangs their soon on their glass. Many recient wedding have required the guests to instead sing something, which is a lot more fun. (more so if they can't carry a tune. Anyone over 7 should be shot for attempting the Barney song though)
In your wedding make them do something with the gift instead. Mess up all the rubiks cubes, and only kiss when shown a solved one for example. Warning, make sure half the cubes are something simple like the donut holes, people will be mad if it can't be done, but if there is something simple, and they can try a few neighbor's cubes until they remember the trick they will think it fun.
I just wish all programing languages had things like function calls. I recall one case where I had to write an array to hardware in one atomic operation. (If it wasn't atomic I would have to block real time data for a long time, not recomended when they are going to do performance tests on that data, to say nothing about what customers would think) My programing language didn't support arrays or function calls, other than calls to C code that couldn't return a pointer. I ended up with code like this:
Find slotdata for slot 1
slot1data=slotdata->port1
slot1data+=slotdata->port2... for all ports on slot 1
Find slotdata for slot 2
slot2data=slotdata->port1
slot2data+=slotdata->port2... for all ports on slot 2... For all 16 slots!
callCExternal writeSlotData(slot1data, slot2data,...)
Oh, and the same code had to be cut and pasted two 3 different "functions" because I might need to write that data from 3 different places and there were no funciton calls.
Please, if you design a language don't ignore the bascis just because you have a good idea. In my case the language generally allowed me to do everything I needed without arrays, and normally I could design things so that function calls were not needed. Not in this case though.
I figgure that if crackers (not hackers) find a bunch of ways to break linux such that it is no longer trusted (that is the need to patch and update gets in the way of buisness) that everyone will just switch to OpenBSD and be done with it.
As evidence against my claim I present to you the fact that most companys [that went to outlook at one time] still use outLook on windows for their eMail.
your car is a fucking moving vehicle that can at times reach speeds of 100 mph. Do you want your radio to just 'slide in and out', possibly decapitating you or smashing your chest in when you get into a headon wreck at 140mph combined speed? Cars are built a little bit more robustly than computers, and yes, screws and bolts are always needed
I know several people who have replaced their car radio with a slide out model. They can remove their entire radio in under 10 seconds. Theft protection is why they do it. They have no problems with it sliding out without their intervention, and there is no hint that in an accident these radios cause extra problems.
Unfortunatly there is no standard for slide outs, but your point that radios chouldn't slide out in seconds for safety reasons have been proven wrong.
You missed what I alternativly think is either the coolest, or the worst feature of TCL: It is one of the few languages left that does not have static type scope. This allows for some wonderful ways to ensure you are never fired. (Sure just access the variable foo from two function calls back directly, but God only knows which of the many functions with foo that is). There are also times when you MUST use this feature. (Though I only encountered it once in my 40,000 lines of TCL, it was difficult to make work)
Everyone should expirence this at least once so they know what the old farts are talking about when they mention dynamic typing. IBM used to have one guy whos job was to assign variable names, and you couldn't have a tempary variable without his permission. Fortunatly TCL isn't purely dynamicly typed, so you can re-use variable names.
That comment isn't as intelligent as it sounds. Modern tempered glass doesn't breaky very easially, and can stand up to baseballs. And that is assuming it is even glass, some windows are actually plastic, which can be bullet proof! Patio doors wouldn't be possible without that. (Or at least not as most houses have them with a patio door installed, but no deck outside since a kid could break through regular glass and fall several floors) Modern windows are a lot more complex than glass in a frame. Fortunatly they work just like the old type, just better.
I'm not trying to imply that you can't break this glass, because you can. However you can beat a patio door with a sledge hammer and not be sure of it breaking.
In fact most (98% if I remember right) of blind people have some vision, at least enough to point at the sun. However they do not have enough vision to get by with normal day to day activities. In other words most peoples impression of blindness is seeing nothing at all, but that is wrong. However for the most part it is better to have that impression and be pleasently surprized when someone who is blind can do something that requires sight.
Vision Impairment is vague. I wear glasses, because I'm vision impaired, but with correction I see 20/20, so I'm not blind. I'm also vision imparied because I'm color blind, but it doesn't prevent me from doing any normal activities. (In fact I can do most jobs that require normal color vision even though I fail a color blindness test)
6 sigma works great for some things, but it is expensive to reach it. Do not lose sight of the fact that you don't always needs such agressive goals. There is nothing wrong with deciding that 3 sigma is good enough for you, and a lot cheaper to reach.
Remember the goal is to reduce costs. If you spend 6 billion to reach 5 sigma, and save 15 million per year, you will never pay off your investment. (Unless your company can honestly say that their products will still be in demand 2000 years from now, something history doesn't support) When talking to management do not forget that costs are what they should be thinking about. Those who understand 6 sigma will readially agree with you when you suggest that you don't have to reach as high.
That said, do not try to kill legitamit projects. Real money can be saved by following 6 sigma mythods. Perhaps not everything will apply to you, but take the good and make something work. There is no need for not invented here syndrom.
I've found two good souces for new reading material. The library and co-authors of my favorites. They work togather for me. Fan sites and reviews might help, but I've never bothered with them. You need to find what works for you. I don't personally know anyone who likes the books I do, so I can't get their recamendataion, but if you can find people who think like you great.
The library is great because when I don't pay for a book I don't feel bad about wasting money on it. When I buy a book and hate it I read the whole thing anyway because I've spent good money on it. When I check it out I read until I decide that I don't like it (several chapters generally) and then return it.
Co-authors are harder to guess, but if I like Joe, and joe writes with Frank, I'll read their book, and unless I hate that book I'll try a few things that Frank wrote alone. The theory is that Joe wouldn't work with Frank if he didn't like how Frank wrote, so they likely write similear. Since there are good authors who write something other than SF, This is a good way to discover which general fiction authors you can stand.
I've often said that I need two vechicals: a 1 ton, long box, crew cab pickup with the big engine (likely the diesel, but given how they start in our MN winters the V10 might be better some days), and a one person car that can reach freeway speeds, and uses as little gas as possible to do that.
Reality jumps in though: I cannot afford that. That pickup that I drive one weekend a month (but long distances and/or off road so rental is not an option) will need maintance no matter what. In fact vechicals that jsut around most of the time often need more maintance than the same one that is driven every day, so maintance is doubled. Then there is insurance on it, since no insurance company will belive me when I say that I'm physically incapable of driving two cars at once. Sure the little car is a lot cheaper, but it still costs more money, and insurance on a rec only truck is more than insurance for a recreation+commuting truck (just ask your agent). Don't forget car payments, even if the car is a beater, using the truck as a backup, it has to get me there most days or I get fired, so the cheapest cars are out.
So I compromise: I drive a S10, which isn't as good as a real truck, doesn't haul as many people as the SUVs or a large car, (I'm single so this isn't an issue for me, but for most it is), gets only slightly better milage than a truck. I look at it as the worst of all worlds, but I only have one vechical to worry about and it serves all jobs.
P.S. I did the cost comparition when gas got up to $1.75/gallon, and discovered that I'd either need to drive 50+ miles to work to make the costs of two vechicals work out. That comparing 20 mpg (what I get now) to 50mpg. And 50mpg cars are not very common, most of the ecconomy cars to 35-45.
Otherwise I agree. Visually Handicapped means nothing until I think about it, and then I'm not sure. Blind means something to everyone. Almost blind means something. Colour Blind means something. Blind in one eye (but other eye is fine) means something. There are many other things that can make something visually handicapped. All of the above qualify for Visually handicapped, but only a few of them will make it impossible to read a comptuer screen, though many more make it difficult.
Words mean things, when you use the wrong word you confuse everyone. Politicaly correct terms often (but not always) just make it difficult to figgure out what you are taking about, and in the end nothing is added.
As the C ten commandments points out: for they [Those who shout political correct language] believe that great efforts and loud shouting devoted to the ritual purification of the language will somehow redound to the benefit of the downtrodden (whose real and grievous woes tendeth to get lost amidst all that thunder and fury.
The blind have pleny of problems. Being refered to as blind isn't one.
My experience is that you are wrong, not on the idea, but the reality.
When I went to high school they were proud of there up to date computer lab running what buisness was running. Students were mostly taught WordPerfect5.1 for dos, on a Novell network (generally 8086 computers, which were plenty fast for that job). By the time I got out of college a 486 was slow, Nobody ran dos anymore. Most people had novell, but were making plans to move to NT (now implimented for the majority). Companies did not use products like Exchange, which now run the company, often getting more use than the word processor.
In short technology is still changing far too fast to worry about teaching exactly the products used in school. Teach the concepts and let the kids learn the specific implimentation when they get there. Otherwise they will find themselves an expert in office2003 in a world where everyone uses office2006 (I'm just guessing on versions of course).
Hey, they is a good idea. I'm going to become a professional musician, everyone please make sure you download my music, set a script to do is constantly. I don't care if you listen or not (and unless you like really bad music you don't want to), so long as I get enough hits that I can do what I really want to do with my time instead of working a real job.
Oh, that is why socalism works better on paper than in reality?
When I go to my garrage and create an artisticly worth bookshelf and sell it, my rights to it end there. In the same amount of time it takes to make that bookcase I can write an artisticly worthy short story, and my rights to collect go on for years. Now I will agree that I should collect on the story enough to pay for my time, that is afterall the purpose of copyright. However I should not retire off of it, collecting income for the rest of my life!
Forget about life. Make it a flat 5 years (or whatever) copyright, and after that you should go on to something else. If you can't recover all your costs of writing the story in 5 years you never will - after all best sellers are often out of print within that time. Patents only give you 17 (? about that) years, and in the cases of some drugs billions are spent that need to be recovered. Stories are much easier to create as far as time and cost, but 90+ years are given to recover it. Sure they spend a lot more on big budget movies and on a novel, but that can all be recovered in 5 years, or odds are it never will be.
Forget about the love wife after the author dies. My mom will get nothing when my dad dies from all the work he put in over the years. REcignising that my mom hasn't worked in 20 years (she raised us kids), dad purchased a life insurance policy that will allow her to attend 5 years of college should he die - enough time to learn something useful to support her the rest of her life. Authors have the same ability to purchase life insurance as my dad, perhaps they should!
Keep in mind that the courts have universially held that people have the right to work a job they are qualified for. In otherwords non-competes are the easiest things to break in court. Not only to you have to find a job with a competitor, but they have to prove that you took their non-public info with you. Not just that you know how the device works, but that you know how their device worked, and how they solved some specific problems with that device type. (and you can probably get away with knowing that something is often a problem so you design to prevent it, so long as you don't use something they have). Note that in most cases things you can't take with should be protected by either a patent or copyright.
Sure publishers should be a filter, but they are not. Mercedes Lackey was one of my favorite authors, but her latest works have not been worth reading. Same for most other authors, they get successful, get a name, and then ride it instead of producing. (And yes I'm aware that she writes things that are not fo interest to me, I'm refering to books that by the cover and subject appeared to aim at my tastes) An honest publisher would ahve taken a read at some of her recient books, and said "Nice rough draft, but you will dissapoint fans if you publish it, so go write something they will like."
I buy authors because most people cannot write, and those that can often don't write the kind of thing I'm interested in. By sticking with a good author and/or publisher I should have confidence that I will get something good, that I will like. It doesn't happen that way at all in fiction, and even in non-fiction everyone has a few bombs.
Part of the problem in fiction is authoers write fences around themselves. They create a wonderful world that people love, put some memerable heros in it, and then belive the fans who say they want more. We want more only when there is more to say.
Force all FCC media to provide equal time? I find that distasteful. We have freedom of the press, meaning the press can say/do whatever they want. While equal time sounds good on the surface, it is one step down the path of goverment forcing the press to say what they want. I've seen enough slippery slopes to know that things really to keep sliding once you start, and you never get back uphill, sometimes you call stall the slide for a few years, but it comes back. Better to stop this one here than let it continute.
Sure in my lifetime the press will likely remain fairly free (though note that the press rarely takes advantage of their freedoms like they should), but I don't want my [great great great grand] children to face a socity without freedom. (Not to imply that I live in a free socity)
I hope that this will spur web developers to write sites that will render well everywhere, not just on one specific browser. When ie dominates you write for ie. When netscape and ie split the market you either write for both (not easy, but doable), or you write simple standard html that either can handle even though things look a little different. When there is enough comptition that nobody dominates the market then you write good clean html and hope that the browsers render the standard well.
Note the above is a simplification, but it is useful anyway.
I ask because it seems there are two classes of people: Those who have done a lot of theory work (Alan Turning), and those who are famious for modern programs (Linus). If you have a nateral division it would be worth using this seperation, even if it means renaming current rooms. (I'd retire the old names though, otherwise people will end up in the old room by habbit)
Slashdot Mirror
Learning programing languages is trivial to a programer. Learning how to use any on to the best advantage can take years, but all you do in those years is memorise more and more library/template procedures and the gotchas of useing them. If you cannot learn both well enough to fool the teacher, then you should not be in CS.
When I took CS the only language course that was required tought 12 langugaes in 10 weeks. It wasn't a big deal, we learned the syntax, and how to do some simple things (a binary tree or simlear) and moved on. Of course we were just told what the "standard library" was called, and told if we really used the language to look it up, because it will save a lot of time.
Come to think of it, other than the one class that covered 12 languages, we wre simply told in class to submit assignments in such and such a language, and if we didn't know it (and the introduction class was tought in Scheme in large part because it was likely we didn't know it!) we were expected to pick it up on our own. In this was I knew 3 of the 12 languages tought in the languages class when I could finially get into it.
In the course description of Cobol there was a warning "CS student may not take Cobol for credit". The same line was in the description of Fortran and C. A CS student should pick up anything that a class on a language can teach on their own. A CS student is expect to spend their time learning data structers, algorithms, and other things that make the different between someone who can bang out a little ugly code when needed, and someone who can take requirement and turn out a maintanable program in as few line as possible.
Amoung the bottom of the barrel equipment makers Sony stands out as amoung the best. Feel better now?
I can't afford a several thousand dollar stereo, and I wouldn't listen to it enough to justify it if I could. When I bought my $3000 stereo I tried every model in the store, and the Sony I bought has better sound than the others at that price point. It is by no means the best stereo out there, but at my budget it is the best, and to most people budget is important.
I'm not sure what the catch/latch is, but they can deactiate it and slide the radio out in 10 seconds. There is no safety problem, they don't come out on their own, yet are easially removeable in seconds when someone wants to remove them.
I've been told that locksmiths varry. Some will take your do not duplicate key, cut a copy. Others will first verify that you have a right to the key, and some will refuse to touch it, perhaps even reporting you to police. Some of those who will duplicate your key will then happily stamp your copy "do not duplicate".
Of course this assumes that key blanks exist, many of the "high security" locks achive that by not making blanks. Home Depot won't not copy your do not duplicate key, but a locksmith is a different story.
One presumes that criminals have their own ways of getting
When I had they key to a fast food restaruant they changed whenever someone who had the key left. Even with the "do not duplicate" stamp and no key blank it is too easy to copy a key. (And fast food doesn't exactly attract the best people, it would be trivial for such people to get the underground scene to copy their key before they turn it in) For much the same reason the safe combo was changed. (Note, the security procedures were better than that, but they recignise that they are not perfect and ask us not to discuss them so I'm only telling the obvious parts)
The tardition at weddings (at least around my area...) is that the couple kisses everytime someone bangs their soon on their glass. Many recient wedding have required the guests to instead sing something, which is a lot more fun. (more so if they can't carry a tune. Anyone over 7 should be shot for attempting the Barney song though)
In your wedding make them do something with the gift instead. Mess up all the rubiks cubes, and only kiss when shown a solved one for example. Warning, make sure half the cubes are something simple like the donut holes, people will be mad if it can't be done, but if there is something simple, and they can try a few neighbor's cubes until they remember the trick they will think it fun.
I just wish all programing languages had things like function calls. I recall one case where I had to write an array to hardware in one atomic operation. (If it wasn't atomic I would have to block real time data for a long time, not recomended when they are going to do performance tests on that data, to say nothing about what customers would think) My programing language didn't support arrays or function calls, other than calls to C code that couldn't return a pointer. I ended up with code like this: Find slotdata for slot 1 slot1data=slotdata->port1 slot1data+=slotdata->port2 ... for all ports on slot 1
Find slotdata for slot 2
slot2data=slotdata->port1
slot2data+=slotdata->port2 ... for all ports on slot 2 ... For all 16 slots!
callCExternal writeSlotData(slot1data, slot2data,...)
Oh, and the same code had to be cut and pasted two 3 different "functions" because I might need to write that data from 3 different places and there were no funciton calls.
Please, if you design a language don't ignore the bascis just because you have a good idea. In my case the language generally allowed me to do everything I needed without arrays, and normally I could design things so that function calls were not needed. Not in this case though.
Perhaps this is another case where useage differs on either side of the pond.
I figgure that if crackers (not hackers) find a bunch of ways to break linux such that it is no longer trusted (that is the need to patch and update gets in the way of buisness) that everyone will just switch to OpenBSD and be done with it.
As evidence against my claim I present to you the fact that most companys [that went to outlook at one time] still use outLook on windows for their eMail.
your car is a fucking moving vehicle that can at times reach speeds of 100 mph. Do you want your radio to just 'slide in and out', possibly decapitating you or smashing your chest in when you get into a headon wreck at 140mph combined speed? Cars are built a little bit more robustly than computers, and yes, screws and bolts are always needed
I know several people who have replaced their car radio with a slide out model. They can remove their entire radio in under 10 seconds. Theft protection is why they do it. They have no problems with it sliding out without their intervention, and there is no hint that in an accident these radios cause extra problems.
Unfortunatly there is no standard for slide outs, but your point that radios chouldn't slide out in seconds for safety reasons have been proven wrong.
You missed what I alternativly think is either the coolest, or the worst feature of TCL: It is one of the few languages left that does not have static type scope. This allows for some wonderful ways to ensure you are never fired. (Sure just access the variable foo from two function calls back directly, but God only knows which of the many functions with foo that is). There are also times when you MUST use this feature. (Though I only encountered it once in my 40,000 lines of TCL, it was difficult to make work)
Everyone should expirence this at least once so they know what the old farts are talking about when they mention dynamic typing. IBM used to have one guy whos job was to assign variable names, and you couldn't have a tempary variable without his permission. Fortunatly TCL isn't purely dynamicly typed, so you can re-use variable names.
That comment isn't as intelligent as it sounds. Modern tempered glass doesn't breaky very easially, and can stand up to baseballs. And that is assuming it is even glass, some windows are actually plastic, which can be bullet proof! Patio doors wouldn't be possible without that. (Or at least not as most houses have them with a patio door installed, but no deck outside since a kid could break through regular glass and fall several floors) Modern windows are a lot more complex than glass in a frame. Fortunatly they work just like the old type, just better.
I'm not trying to imply that you can't break this glass, because you can. However you can beat a patio door with a sledge hammer and not be sure of it breaking.
In fact most (98% if I remember right) of blind people have some vision, at least enough to point at the sun. However they do not have enough vision to get by with normal day to day activities. In other words most peoples impression of blindness is seeing nothing at all, but that is wrong. However for the most part it is better to have that impression and be pleasently surprized when someone who is blind can do something that requires sight.
Vision Impairment is vague. I wear glasses, because I'm vision impaired, but with correction I see 20/20, so I'm not blind. I'm also vision imparied because I'm color blind, but it doesn't prevent me from doing any normal activities. (In fact I can do most jobs that require normal color vision even though I fail a color blindness test)
6 sigma works great for some things, but it is expensive to reach it. Do not lose sight of the fact that you don't always needs such agressive goals. There is nothing wrong with deciding that 3 sigma is good enough for you, and a lot cheaper to reach.
Remember the goal is to reduce costs. If you spend 6 billion to reach 5 sigma, and save 15 million per year, you will never pay off your investment. (Unless your company can honestly say that their products will still be in demand 2000 years from now, something history doesn't support) When talking to management do not forget that costs are what they should be thinking about. Those who understand 6 sigma will readially agree with you when you suggest that you don't have to reach as high.
That said, do not try to kill legitamit projects. Real money can be saved by following 6 sigma mythods. Perhaps not everything will apply to you, but take the good and make something work. There is no need for not invented here syndrom.
I've found two good souces for new reading material. The library and co-authors of my favorites. They work togather for me. Fan sites and reviews might help, but I've never bothered with them. You need to find what works for you. I don't personally know anyone who likes the books I do, so I can't get their recamendataion, but if you can find people who think like you great.
The library is great because when I don't pay for a book I don't feel bad about wasting money on it. When I buy a book and hate it I read the whole thing anyway because I've spent good money on it. When I check it out I read until I decide that I don't like it (several chapters generally) and then return it.
Co-authors are harder to guess, but if I like Joe, and joe writes with Frank, I'll read their book, and unless I hate that book I'll try a few things that Frank wrote alone. The theory is that Joe wouldn't work with Frank if he didn't like how Frank wrote, so they likely write similear. Since there are good authors who write something other than SF, This is a good way to discover which general fiction authors you can stand.
I've often said that I need two vechicals: a 1 ton, long box, crew cab pickup with the big engine (likely the diesel, but given how they start in our MN winters the V10 might be better some days), and a one person car that can reach freeway speeds, and uses as little gas as possible to do that.
Reality jumps in though: I cannot afford that. That pickup that I drive one weekend a month (but long distances and/or off road so rental is not an option) will need maintance no matter what. In fact vechicals that jsut around most of the time often need more maintance than the same one that is driven every day, so maintance is doubled. Then there is insurance on it, since no insurance company will belive me when I say that I'm physically incapable of driving two cars at once. Sure the little car is a lot cheaper, but it still costs more money, and insurance on a rec only truck is more than insurance for a recreation+commuting truck (just ask your agent). Don't forget car payments, even if the car is a beater, using the truck as a backup, it has to get me there most days or I get fired, so the cheapest cars are out.
So I compromise: I drive a S10, which isn't as good as a real truck, doesn't haul as many people as the SUVs or a large car, (I'm single so this isn't an issue for me, but for most it is), gets only slightly better milage than a truck. I look at it as the worst of all worlds, but I only have one vechical to worry about and it serves all jobs.
P.S. I did the cost comparition when gas got up to $1.75/gallon, and discovered that I'd either need to drive 50+ miles to work to make the costs of two vechicals work out. That comparing 20 mpg (what I get now) to 50mpg. And 50mpg cars are not very common, most of the ecconomy cars to 35-45.
I think you mean the term is blind, not deaf.
Otherwise I agree. Visually Handicapped means nothing until I think about it, and then I'm not sure. Blind means something to everyone. Almost blind means something. Colour Blind means something. Blind in one eye (but other eye is fine) means something. There are many other things that can make something visually handicapped. All of the above qualify for Visually handicapped, but only a few of them will make it impossible to read a comptuer screen, though many more make it difficult.
Words mean things, when you use the wrong word you confuse everyone. Politicaly correct terms often (but not always) just make it difficult to figgure out what you are taking about, and in the end nothing is added.
As the C ten commandments points out: for they [Those who shout political correct language] believe that great efforts and loud shouting devoted to the ritual purification of the language will somehow redound to the benefit of the downtrodden (whose real and grievous woes tendeth to get lost amidst all that thunder and fury.
The blind have pleny of problems. Being refered to as blind isn't one.
My experience is that you are wrong, not on the idea, but the reality.
When I went to high school they were proud of there up to date computer lab running what buisness was running. Students were mostly taught WordPerfect5.1 for dos, on a Novell network (generally 8086 computers, which were plenty fast for that job). By the time I got out of college a 486 was slow, Nobody ran dos anymore. Most people had novell, but were making plans to move to NT (now implimented for the majority). Companies did not use products like Exchange, which now run the company, often getting more use than the word processor.
In short technology is still changing far too fast to worry about teaching exactly the products used in school. Teach the concepts and let the kids learn the specific implimentation when they get there. Otherwise they will find themselves an expert in office2003 in a world where everyone uses office2006 (I'm just guessing on versions of course).
Hey, they is a good idea. I'm going to become a professional musician, everyone please make sure you download my music, set a script to do is constantly. I don't care if you listen or not (and unless you like really bad music you don't want to), so long as I get enough hits that I can do what I really want to do with my time instead of working a real job.
Oh, that is why socalism works better on paper than in reality?
What is the point of life+something?
When I go to my garrage and create an artisticly worth bookshelf and sell it, my rights to it end there. In the same amount of time it takes to make that bookcase I can write an artisticly worthy short story, and my rights to collect go on for years. Now I will agree that I should collect on the story enough to pay for my time, that is afterall the purpose of copyright. However I should not retire off of it, collecting income for the rest of my life!
Forget about life. Make it a flat 5 years (or whatever) copyright, and after that you should go on to something else. If you can't recover all your costs of writing the story in 5 years you never will - after all best sellers are often out of print within that time. Patents only give you 17 (? about that) years, and in the cases of some drugs billions are spent that need to be recovered. Stories are much easier to create as far as time and cost, but 90+ years are given to recover it. Sure they spend a lot more on big budget movies and on a novel, but that can all be recovered in 5 years, or odds are it never will be.
Forget about the love wife after the author dies. My mom will get nothing when my dad dies from all the work he put in over the years. REcignising that my mom hasn't worked in 20 years (she raised us kids), dad purchased a life insurance policy that will allow her to attend 5 years of college should he die - enough time to learn something useful to support her the rest of her life. Authors have the same ability to purchase life insurance as my dad, perhaps they should!
Keep in mind that the courts have universially held that people have the right to work a job they are qualified for. In otherwords non-competes are the easiest things to break in court. Not only to you have to find a job with a competitor, but they have to prove that you took their non-public info with you. Not just that you know how the device works, but that you know how their device worked, and how they solved some specific problems with that device type. (and you can probably get away with knowing that something is often a problem so you design to prevent it, so long as you don't use something they have). Note that in most cases things you can't take with should be protected by either a patent or copyright.
Sure publishers should be a filter, but they are not. Mercedes Lackey was one of my favorite authors, but her latest works have not been worth reading. Same for most other authors, they get successful, get a name, and then ride it instead of producing. (And yes I'm aware that she writes things that are not fo interest to me, I'm refering to books that by the cover and subject appeared to aim at my tastes) An honest publisher would ahve taken a read at some of her recient books, and said "Nice rough draft, but you will dissapoint fans if you publish it, so go write something they will like."
I buy authors because most people cannot write, and those that can often don't write the kind of thing I'm interested in. By sticking with a good author and/or publisher I should have confidence that I will get something good, that I will like. It doesn't happen that way at all in fiction, and even in non-fiction everyone has a few bombs.
Part of the problem in fiction is authoers write fences around themselves. They create a wonderful world that people love, put some memerable heros in it, and then belive the fans who say they want more. We want more only when there is more to say.
Force all FCC media to provide equal time? I find that distasteful. We have freedom of the press, meaning the press can say/do whatever they want. While equal time sounds good on the surface, it is one step down the path of goverment forcing the press to say what they want. I've seen enough slippery slopes to know that things really to keep sliding once you start, and you never get back uphill, sometimes you call stall the slide for a few years, but it comes back. Better to stop this one here than let it continute.
Sure in my lifetime the press will likely remain fairly free (though note that the press rarely takes advantage of their freedoms like they should), but I don't want my [great great great grand] children to face a socity without freedom. (Not to imply that I live in a free socity)
I disagree, Compaq may have killed AltaVitsa, but it was doing a fair job of commiting sucicide after that.
I hope that this will spur web developers to write sites that will render well everywhere, not just on one specific browser. When ie dominates you write for ie. When netscape and ie split the market you either write for both (not easy, but doable), or you write simple standard html that either can handle even though things look a little different. When there is enough comptition that nobody dominates the market then you write good clean html and hope that the browsers render the standard well.
Note the above is a simplification, but it is useful anyway.
I ask because it seems there are two classes of people: Those who have done a lot of theory work (Alan Turning), and those who are famious for modern programs (Linus). If you have a nateral division it would be worth using this seperation, even if it means renaming current rooms. (I'd retire the old names though, otherwise people will end up in the old room by habbit)