That's ridiculous. Drupal is framework, and its default use is content management.
If you want to use it as a custom application, its node system and aspect-oriented hook system make it extremely flexible.
It's not the corn farmers. The farmers are losing money year over year. Most of them are now over 60.
It's the huge agribusiness corporations like Archers Daniel Midland that are to blame.
"Wouldn't it be great if the state let the parents sit down with their children and choose as a family what they're going to believe?"
Um. I'm not sure which country you're referring to, but here in the United States the rights reside with the people, not with the government. The states don't let the parents do such-and-such.
What I don't understand is that this group of people (computer programmers) is so anti-intelligent design.
We design programs. I consider myself a decent programmer (though not a star programmer) but I can't for the life of me write programs without bugs. If I, an intelligent entity, can't do this, should I reason that I should use evolutionary programming instead, where I let the computer select among 500,000 randomly generated algorithms to see which ones work? And even if I took that approach, I'd still need to know what the purpose of the program was ahead of time in order to determine what the "best" solution was.
I hear a lot of people saying "ID is just creationism!" But it's not; to state that just demonstrates ignorance. Have you read Dembski's work? Have you read Cordova's takedown of Ellsberry's response?
Another argument I hear frequently is, "who designed the designer" (question is absurd; the designer is outside the design) and "well, the designer sure got a lot of things wrong" (ID does not posit the character of the designer).
If you're going to critique intelligent design, do it on the basis of the theories presented. Respond to the theories; don't respond by ignorant conjecture. If you don't know the definition of "complex specified information", you should probably learn it before posting anything about ID.
Actually, mosquitoes ARE flies. They belong to the order Diptera (di meaning two and pteron meaning wing). Flies are characterised by having only one pair of wings. Other insects have two pairs.
Mosquitoes are in the family Culicidae of the order Diptera.
I don't see how the incoherent rantings about flamethrowers are insightful.
Billions of dollars have been spent on mosquito eradication using methods ranging from spraying DDT to reducing breeding sources. These methods have not succeeded, and even the WHO's much vaunted Rollback Malaria initiative is floundering.
The fact is that that this approach is worth trying. The challenge is that your stealth males must be at least as evolutionarily "fit" as the wild males they are competing against. That's not easy to do.
Yes, those nasty Christians. The ones who kept learning alive inside monasteries during the Middle Ages. The ones who started the universities. Christians like Newton, Darwin and Galileo.
The poster demonstrates ignorance of the effect Christianity had on learning in Europe.
One of the highlights for me was the talk by Dries Buytaert, founder of Drupal, on Thursday.
Drupal is way ahead of Ruby on Rails in terms of flexibility, scalability and implementation, IMO. They work in different spaces (Ruby hosting is scarce, though there are a few) but the clean architecture and extensibility of Drupal while remaining fast and small is exciting.
Modules need to be compiled? Uh, no. Maybe you're thinking of C?
You do need to check a box to turn the module on, and in some cases modify your database if the module creates new tables. But I like that, because I know exactly what the module's going to do.
A module installer is in the works.
OK, I'll explain the joke to you. Some people feel that PHP, with it's required parentheses, brackets, and somewhat homegrown syntax, is innately unclean; therefore, "clean PHP" for these people is an oxymoron.
All right, architected isn't a word. Drupal is well designed.
Perhaps one of the reasons is that with Drupal, more than a surface-level evaluation is needed. The power of single and multiple hierarchical taxonomies, for example, is not something the average person can understand at a glance, yet is incredibly powerful.
Drupal is about structured information. That's power.
Drupal is a CMS that is incredibly well architected and flexible. It needs a bit of flash (not Flash) and polish, but for a framework that is modular and customizable, it's great.
It's written in PHP, but it's clean PHP, if there is such a thing.
Slashdot Mirror
That's ridiculous. Drupal is framework, and its default use is content management. If you want to use it as a custom application, its node system and aspect-oriented hook system make it extremely flexible.
It's not the corn farmers. The farmers are losing money year over year. Most of them are now over 60. It's the huge agribusiness corporations like Archers Daniel Midland that are to blame.
"Wouldn't it be great if the state let the parents sit down with their children and choose as a family what they're going to believe?"
Um. I'm not sure which country you're referring to, but here in the United States the rights reside with the people, not with the government. The states don't let the parents do such-and-such.
Any economy these days, be it that of a town, city, state or country, cannot exist without a strong scientific and technical foundation.
The Amish would beg to differ, I'm sure.
Drupal was patched in June and August.
It's not flamebait, doofus moderator. I am genuinely puzzled why so many designers (programmers) hold that we can't recognize design emperically.
We design programs. I consider myself a decent programmer (though not a star programmer) but I can't for the life of me write programs without bugs. If I, an intelligent entity, can't do this, should I reason that I should use evolutionary programming instead, where I let the computer select among 500,000 randomly generated algorithms to see which ones work? And even if I took that approach, I'd still need to know what the purpose of the program was ahead of time in order to determine what the "best" solution was.
I hear a lot of people saying "ID is just creationism!" But it's not; to state that just demonstrates ignorance. Have you read Dembski's work? Have you read Cordova's takedown of Ellsberry's response?
Another argument I hear frequently is, "who designed the designer" (question is absurd; the designer is outside the design) and "well, the designer sure got a lot of things wrong" (ID does not posit the character of the designer).
If you're going to critique intelligent design, do it on the basis of the theories presented. Respond to the theories; don't respond by ignorant conjecture. If you don't know the definition of "complex specified information", you should probably learn it before posting anything about ID.
Mosquitoes are in the family Culicidae of the order Diptera.
Billions of dollars have been spent on mosquito eradication using methods ranging from spraying DDT to reducing breeding sources. These methods have not succeeded, and even the WHO's much vaunted Rollback Malaria initiative is floundering.
The fact is that that this approach is worth trying. The challenge is that your stealth males must be at least as evolutionarily "fit" as the wild males they are competing against. That's not easy to do.
I'll second this. We use Drupal to log all of our IT activities, documentation about servers, etc.
It's like a combination of how-to archives, project management, and local search engine. And taxonomy makes it happen.
We have taxonomies set up for project state (planning, started, etc.), importance (moderate, critical, etc.).
With Drupal 4.7's support for free tagging, it rocks. Plus, RSS feeds everywhere.
I'm allergic to corn, you insensitive clod!
Yes, those nasty Christians. The ones who kept learning alive inside monasteries during the Middle Ages. The ones who started the universities. Christians like Newton, Darwin and Galileo.
The poster demonstrates ignorance of the effect Christianity had on learning in Europe.
Drupal rocks.
One of the highlights for me was the talk by Dries Buytaert, founder of Drupal, on Thursday.
Drupal is way ahead of Ruby on Rails in terms of flexibility, scalability and implementation, IMO. They work in different spaces (Ruby hosting is scarce, though there are a few) but the clean architecture and extensibility of Drupal while remaining fast and small is exciting.
The Drupal BOF was well-attended (they even had a full buffet!). Both http://www.bryght.com/ and http://civicspacelabs.org/home/ were represented.
The server has not been moved yet. The original server is still serving drupal.org.
Modules need to be compiled? Uh, no. Maybe you're thinking of C? You do need to check a box to turn the module on, and in some cases modify your database if the module creates new tables. But I like that, because I know exactly what the module's going to do. A module installer is in the works.
Yeah, and with the TinyMCE, image, and img_assist module things get really easy for end-users.
And Drupal, in particular, stands out as an exception to PHP-what-have-ya coding.
Why add such a comment?
OK, I'll explain the joke to you. Some people feel that PHP, with it's required parentheses, brackets, and somewhat homegrown syntax, is innately unclean; therefore, "clean PHP" for these people is an oxymoron.
All right, architected isn't a word. Drupal is well designed.
Perhaps one of the reasons is that with Drupal, more than a surface-level evaluation is needed. The power of single and multiple hierarchical taxonomies, for example, is not something the average person can understand at a glance, yet is incredibly powerful. Drupal is about structured information. That's power.
Drupal is a CMS that is incredibly well architected and flexible. It needs a bit of flash (not Flash) and polish, but for a framework that is modular and customizable, it's great.
It's written in PHP, but it's clean PHP, if there is such a thing.