I can't stand lining up comments to the right of code, for several reasons:
- Comments that are lined up to the right are often off the screen. The code grows horizontally, and entire pages worth of comments get pushed off the right edge of visible area. - Because of the first issue, I may not notice multi-line comments when inserting new lines of code. Wash, rinse, repeat, add a few more comments to those, and suddenly nothing to the right makes sense anymore. - Even if I can see the comments, the description of variables and other short lines are often so far away that it is harder to read.
People, please, comment above your code instead of to the right!
You didn't mention that a phone looks totally different from a computer. A tablet, not so much (but now thanks to Apple, they are now classified as very separate devices with different expectations).
convincing people that Windows 8 on desktops will run desktop applications. You see that confusion here on Slashdot all the time.
Confusion? No... more like complaining. People on Slashdot know the difference, they just don't like Microsoft or they just want to complain about something.
The desktop/laptop form factor will almost certainly use full Windows 8. The confusion should be minimal. But I'm sure there will be some ARM netbooks/tablets with built-on physical keyboards... that will be the most confusing area for consumers.
Incorrect. The product name is "Windows RT", not "Windows 8 RT". Microsoft never confuses the two terms (although resellers are doing so).
That said... Microsoft would be wise to get out in front of this. Allowing resellers to call their products "Windows 8 RT", or to display Windows 8 on an ARM tablet, is not responsible and will cause confusion even if Microsoft is clear in their own usage.
With the robots.txt solution, the way I understand it Google wouldn't even index the full article, and thus text that only appears in the article (not the summary) would not be factored into search results.
This is basically SEO suicide, but whatever... it's their server, they can cry if they want to.
So where does this stop? If I call myself something else, for it to mean anything, others have to call themselves the same.
Say I make up a title, called "Catholic" (just an example... not my denomination). Then people start calling themselves "Catholic", and it becomes popular. More and more people use the term, until finally some nutjob uses it in an "enlightened" quest to rid the world of non-Catholics.
Now I have to make up a new name, so that I am not associated with him? No thanks, I think I'd spend too much of my time creating and spreading new names, when instead I could be using that time to help people with real issues.
This is one guy's view. Being a participant in organized religion, I can vouch that not all organized religion believes the same as this guy.
For that matter, members of the same church often believe different things. It's like calling yourself a Republican or a Democrat. You probably share some very basic values with your party affiliation, but I don't think that every Democrat is a socialist just because a few claim to be.
Religion fucks up everything
You're still generalizing. Some of the best organized charities are directly implemented and funded by religious organizations. At our church, a significant portion of our budget and designated funds have supported local disaster relief efforts. We don't force the Bible down anyone's throat. We don't answer science questions with Bible trivia. We help needs, and if those needs happen to be spiritual, then ok.
This sounds like how Apple restricted other browser apps from using the Nitro Javascript engine.
For that matter, Apple has removed certain apps from their App Store just because they compete with built-in apps. How are they not on the hook for monopolistic behavior?
(This coming from a guy who overall likes Apple and owns several of their products. But I like competition more than I like Apple.)
Actually, I just looked and noticed that Facebook has my phone number. I don't remember ever giving it to them, since I specifically don't want them sending me text messages (I don't have a texting plan and each text is a charge).
When I click to remove it, it says "You will no longer be able to use this phone to receive notifications or upload any photos and videos to Facebook."
Perhaps they got my number because I installed the app on my phone? I just don't remember explicitly giving it to them.
Not that I think his blog is even worth the time to debunk...
But one basic tenet of science is the verification of previous discoveries. I'm glad there are people making new discoveries, but they don't mean much unless others pore over the data and verify it, and others come to the same conclusion by applying the same or similar experiments.
And we should always question how far our experimental results verify the hypothesis in question. This is what happened with Newton. Experimental results verified his theories to the extent that mattered at the time, but the results didn't hold up to interpolation to very large speeds.
So... I disagree that everyone should look to the unexplored domains for discoveries. Some discoveries can be found in scrutinizing the discoveries that have already been made.
You're the one who turned my car argument into a "mobility" strawman. Walking doesn't require a company or government agency to provide a service or product.
Of course, that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.
We aren't talking about the right to purchase Internet service, and we aren't talking about the right to purchase cars. We are talking about the right to have those things provided by the government at no direct cost.
If anyone is going to buy Nokia, it makes sense for Microsoft to do so. It could become Microsoft's chief mobile hardware partner, and perhaps could offer something in the Xbox arena. The result would be a partnership similar to Google and Motorola.
The main reason why this original question is not insightfull is: someone focuses on one platform (.Net) which runs basically only on one OS (windows) which implies: he has no clue about computing even while he is already 40, cough cough.
Or, perhaps he knew what platform his shop was targeting. Perhaps he was given the explicit requirements to use VB.NET and not C# or Java or whatever.
If you had said that he is not well rounded, I would have agreed with you. But the only one who has "no clue" is the one who thinks that everyone should know Assembly, Fortran, Cobol, Smalltalk, C, Pascal, Modula 2, Java, Ruby, Haskell, Ada, PHP, Perl, VHDL, LISP, Scheme, Punch Cards, Lolcode, and then "maybe" he'll be good enough to take a job that targets only one of those languages. Get real.
If you have more expenses because you bought more things, which needed to be produced, then you print more dollars. Hence dollars increase more or less as GDP increases.
The entity responsible for printing those dollars gets something for nothing. They print millions of dollars (for essentially no cost), and exchange those for goods and services. They didn't work hard to earn those dollars.
This is inflation... it isn't "useful", and it makes your dollars go down in value over time. The only real good thing about inflation is that in limited amounts, it encourages spending instead of hoarding.
Bitcoins are not actually generated by doing useful work and even worse the system is made to reward disproportionately the early adopters of the system.
Dollars are also not generated by doing useful work. They are generated by a printing press, which is not doing anything inherently useful. I don't really see why rewarding early adopters is a bad thing.
Look at their predicted number of bitcoins in the system to figure it out yourself.
Bitcoins can be subdivided to 8 decimal places, or currently about 1/100,000th of a cent in US dollars. Any deflation that occurs can be handled well into the future.
My understanding is that they attempted to put it on a 5 second delay, but the delay didn't kick in. So it was live, and by the time they knew to cut it, it was too late.
From my understanding, you just described Euclidean relativity and not general relativity.
But I'm not a physicist and special relativity is really about as far as I have grasped significantly. I understand Einstein's formulation of special relativity to say that Minkowski's definition of spacetime, which is opposed to Euclidean spacetime, matches more closely with observations. But a quick Google search seems to indicate that there is a growing set of theories that suggest that relativity and Euclidean spacetime can work cohesively, and that Euclidean spacetime is not just a framework for Newtonian physics.
Slashdot Mirror
Not just a response. A major revamp of a system that has barely made it to market.
Seriously, why did Nintendo announce the Wii U so early? Microsoft almost beat them to market with their own idea.
I can't stand lining up comments to the right of code, for several reasons:
- Comments that are lined up to the right are often off the screen. The code grows horizontally, and entire pages worth of comments get pushed off the right edge of visible area.
- Because of the first issue, I may not notice multi-line comments when inserting new lines of code. Wash, rinse, repeat, add a few more comments to those, and suddenly nothing to the right makes sense anymore.
- Even if I can see the comments, the description of variables and other short lines are often so far away that it is harder to read.
People, please, comment above your code instead of to the right!
Oops... I now see you did mention that the form factor looks different from a desktop.
You didn't mention that a phone looks totally different from a computer. A tablet, not so much (but now thanks to Apple, they are now classified as very separate devices with different expectations).
convincing people that Windows 8 on desktops will run desktop applications. You see that confusion here on Slashdot all the time.
Confusion? No... more like complaining. People on Slashdot know the difference, they just don't like Microsoft or they just want to complain about something.
The desktop/laptop form factor will almost certainly use full Windows 8. The confusion should be minimal. But I'm sure there will be some ARM netbooks/tablets with built-on physical keyboards... that will be the most confusing area for consumers.
Windows 8 RT
Incorrect. The product name is "Windows RT", not "Windows 8 RT". Microsoft never confuses the two terms (although resellers are doing so).
That said... Microsoft would be wise to get out in front of this. Allowing resellers to call their products "Windows 8 RT", or to display Windows 8 on an ARM tablet, is not responsible and will cause confusion even if Microsoft is clear in their own usage.
How many is a brazilian?!
I don't know. Evidently, that's Victoria's secret.
With the robots.txt solution, the way I understand it Google wouldn't even index the full article, and thus text that only appears in the article (not the summary) would not be factored into search results.
This is basically SEO suicide, but whatever... it's their server, they can cry if they want to.
If people drove themselves there would be 10% more fatalities, but over a few generations it could get fewer and fewer
As if computer engineers are going to sit around twiddling their thumbs for "a few generations".
By that time, computers will likely be so sophisticated that it would be considered a crime against humanity to drive a 2 ton vehicle manually.
So where does this stop? If I call myself something else, for it to mean anything, others have to call themselves the same.
Say I make up a title, called "Catholic" (just an example... not my denomination). Then people start calling themselves "Catholic", and it becomes popular. More and more people use the term, until finally some nutjob uses it in an "enlightened" quest to rid the world of non-Catholics.
Now I have to make up a new name, so that I am not associated with him? No thanks, I think I'd spend too much of my time creating and spreading new names, when instead I could be using that time to help people with real issues.
This is one guy's view. Being a participant in organized religion, I can vouch that not all organized religion believes the same as this guy.
For that matter, members of the same church often believe different things. It's like calling yourself a Republican or a Democrat. You probably share some very basic values with your party affiliation, but I don't think that every Democrat is a socialist just because a few claim to be.
Religion fucks up everything
You're still generalizing. Some of the best organized charities are directly implemented and funded by religious organizations. At our church, a significant portion of our budget and designated funds have supported local disaster relief efforts. We don't force the Bible down anyone's throat. We don't answer science questions with Bible trivia. We help needs, and if those needs happen to be spiritual, then ok.
This sounds like how Apple restricted other browser apps from using the Nitro Javascript engine.
For that matter, Apple has removed certain apps from their App Store just because they compete with built-in apps. How are they not on the hook for monopolistic behavior?
(This coming from a guy who overall likes Apple and owns several of their products. But I like competition more than I like Apple.)
Actually, I just looked and noticed that Facebook has my phone number. I don't remember ever giving it to them, since I specifically don't want them sending me text messages (I don't have a texting plan and each text is a charge).
When I click to remove it, it says "You will no longer be able to use this phone to receive notifications or upload any photos and videos to Facebook."
Perhaps they got my number because I installed the app on my phone? I just don't remember explicitly giving it to them.
Not that I think his blog is even worth the time to debunk...
But one basic tenet of science is the verification of previous discoveries. I'm glad there are people making new discoveries, but they don't mean much unless others pore over the data and verify it, and others come to the same conclusion by applying the same or similar experiments.
And we should always question how far our experimental results verify the hypothesis in question. This is what happened with Newton. Experimental results verified his theories to the extent that mattered at the time, but the results didn't hold up to interpolation to very large speeds.
So... I disagree that everyone should look to the unexplored domains for discoveries. Some discoveries can be found in scrutinizing the discoveries that have already been made.
Insightful? Pure unadulterated stupid.
You're the one who turned my car argument into a "mobility" strawman. Walking doesn't require a company or government agency to provide a service or product.
Of course, that has nothing to do with what we're talking about.
We aren't talking about the right to purchase Internet service, and we aren't talking about the right to purchase cars. We are talking about the right to have those things provided by the government at no direct cost.
When living your life often requires internet access, then it becomes a right.
Living your life more often requires a car than internet access. Is owning a car a right? Do we all get free cars?
Is this your uncle?
If anyone is going to buy Nokia, it makes sense for Microsoft to do so. It could become Microsoft's chief mobile hardware partner, and perhaps could offer something in the Xbox arena. The result would be a partnership similar to Google and Motorola.
As a percentage of GDP, the debt has risen 27.6% over Obama's term.
This compares with a rise of 6.3% and 10.1% respectively in GWB's terms, and a rise of 2.2% and reduction of 10.4% in Clinton's two terms.
The main reason why this original question is not insightfull is: someone focuses on one platform (.Net) which runs basically only on one OS (windows) which implies: he has no clue about computing even while he is already 40, cough cough.
Or, perhaps he knew what platform his shop was targeting. Perhaps he was given the explicit requirements to use VB.NET and not C# or Java or whatever.
If you had said that he is not well rounded, I would have agreed with you. But the only one who has "no clue" is the one who thinks that everyone should know Assembly, Fortran, Cobol, Smalltalk, C, Pascal, Modula 2, Java, Ruby, Haskell, Ada, PHP, Perl, VHDL, LISP, Scheme, Punch Cards, Lolcode, and then "maybe" he'll be good enough to take a job that targets only one of those languages. Get real.
And completely free-as-in-beer.
If you have more expenses because you bought more things, which needed to be produced, then you print more dollars. Hence dollars increase more or less as GDP increases.
The entity responsible for printing those dollars gets something for nothing. They print millions of dollars (for essentially no cost), and exchange those for goods and services. They didn't work hard to earn those dollars.
This is inflation... it isn't "useful", and it makes your dollars go down in value over time. The only real good thing about inflation is that in limited amounts, it encourages spending instead of hoarding.
Bitcoins are not actually generated by doing useful work and even worse the system is made to reward disproportionately the early adopters of the system.
Dollars are also not generated by doing useful work. They are generated by a printing press, which is not doing anything inherently useful. I don't really see why rewarding early adopters is a bad thing.
Look at their predicted number of bitcoins in the system to figure it out yourself.
Bitcoins can be subdivided to 8 decimal places, or currently about 1/100,000th of a cent in US dollars. Any deflation that occurs can be handled well into the future.
My understanding is that they attempted to put it on a 5 second delay, but the delay didn't kick in. So it was live, and by the time they knew to cut it, it was too late.
p>It's clear he should just stick with what he is good at: making money by any means necessary
Sounds like a person I would like to see get our government out of debt, and our economy out of the toilet.
From my understanding, you just described Euclidean relativity and not general relativity.
But I'm not a physicist and special relativity is really about as far as I have grasped significantly. I understand Einstein's formulation of special relativity to say that Minkowski's definition of spacetime, which is opposed to Euclidean spacetime, matches more closely with observations. But a quick Google search seems to indicate that there is a growing set of theories that suggest that relativity and Euclidean spacetime can work cohesively, and that Euclidean spacetime is not just a framework for Newtonian physics.