That's one reason why I probably would not make a good soldier. I once watched a news item about a US pilot who had accidentally attacked British ground troops (I think this was in Iraq). They played a cockpit recording of the incident where the pilot was told to abort a seccond attack. You could tell from the pilots voice he was shaken, he said "my God, what have I done". My first thought was how could he not feel the same way when attacking Iraqui troops too. These would also be men with families, probably enlisted without choice. Many of them would have little interest in the politics of the region. Some wife and kids would be left to grieve. When I said this I found that only one other person present thought they would feel the same way as me (fortunatley that was my wife!).
I am not a pacifist but I think that most recent wars are unjustified. Even in necessary defense I would find killing other people very hard.
Any person who cannot complete basic maths, science, and an "English as a second language" qualification, more than likely GCSE, written in their own language, is denied entry.
It would be even better if they applied it to the chavs returning from booze cruises, Lanzarote, and Disney land.
Firstly, nationality is not the same as skin colour. Secondly, it's quite right to discriminate on any basis the country you are seeking to live in decides. Their country, they make the rules.
Every country should be able to set rules for immigrants. The problem is that some people want to apply them to second, third, or twenty-third generation immigrants, and to different racial, regional, ethnic, or religious groups native to the country. Look at all the people on this list complaining because of the proportion of "White British" declining.
to many simple minds - is the equivalent of "dirty foreigner" even if they are 3rd generation Brits...
True enough. My wife is American and to her surprise one of the neighbours tried to "recruit" her into the BNP complaining about some "foreigners" who had moved into the road.
She (bravely in my opinion) pointed out that she was the foreigner, having a US passport and not being a UK citizen, whereas the people who had moved into the road were born British. The racist neighbour litterally did not get it and said "yes but they are the foreign ones really", obviously equating nationality with skin colour even though it contradicted the facts.
For example, sex between castes would quickly lead to serious trouble with the woo fanatics.
Actually there isn't a religious injunction against this, just a social one because the children will generally be of the lower caste. In fact the Mahabharata mentions a king with a wife from each caste. This isn't to let Hinduism off totaly though, because there certainly is an injunction concerning dalits, and of sex outside marriage.
They just want SCIENCE to take away all that awful guilt.
The population of London is expected to drop below 50% English by 2012. Would you want to let that happen with your own capital?
Gosh, like just imagine if Washington DC had less than 50% Native Americans!
The population of London may or may not have more than 50% born abroad (though given the 2001 census figure of 24% that sounds unlikely), but that is not the same as them not being English, many are getting UK citizenship.
It might be more honest if the British Government were to just admit that it is catering to a common and wide streak of racism that persists, and just cart anyone who doesn't speak with a BBC accent off to a concentration camp.
Well it might be worth it to get rid of those Estury English chavs, but the UK would be pretty sparsely populated afterwards, particularly outside the City and Home Counties.
I think they are worried about a "Chrome Frame for Firefox" beating them in acid3, process per tab, performance, etc. They are getting the argument now so thay can say its the principle that's wrong, not sour grapes because they were pipped to the post.
They had a TV program last year when they did some genetic tests on people who considered themselves to be 100% English. I remember that out of 12 one had mitochondrial DNA that would have had his female line originating in Eastern Europe, one had Jewish ancestry and another Indian - and these were all people who did not know of any non-British relatives.
Add to that the millions of people who have known foreign ancestry but British citizenship and the whole idea becomes useless.
This is great news if you believe that Microsoft is pure evil and Google is goodness and light. I suspect that google will have their own lock-in however.
I can't believe that game manufacturers could get away with selling a game that would not play. They certainly would not in the UK (sales of goods act). Therefore the additions must be for extra features.
Because companies intentionally cripple games and then charge you extra to get the full game. THAT is why. When you pay for HBO, HBO doesn't leave out certain shows that you have to pay extra for or only show you 3/4 of an episode and you have to pay extra for the rest of the episode. When you buy a car, they don't sell you the car and then say "oh, well you have to pay another $5,000 if you want a FUEL tank. What? You want to be able to turn it on? Well that's another $4,500 for the ignition!" That kind of garbage is the problem with DLC.
No but they might offer alloy wheels, metalic paint, a sun roof, cruise control, built in GPS, a Carlos Fandango trim kit, and an upgraded stereo at extra cost. Is that so different?
Interesting comparison but the SQL test was a bit off testing a database installed on ext4, a journalling filesystem. Anyone wanting intensive database work would use ext3 for the DB partition.
Also, it would be interesting to see whether FreBSD still outperforms Linux in low-memory situations. This used to be an area where BSD had a clear advantage.
100% coverage is usually overkill. You end up testing getters and setters, which really aren't necessary.
Also to test some exceptions might take more effort than the code itself and only cover something that will happen once a decade. For example coding to test an IOException in a read could be done by writing a mock File object that will throw an exception after a certain number of bytes are read, but then you have to parameterise your file type or use IOC or something and the extra complexity just isn't worth the benefit.
Agile, scrum, patterns, unit tests, etc.
.
Interesting ideas, but can anybody show me *any* significant, quantitative, comparative proof of improved ROI?
.
Software is about money guys.
From experience yes to unit tests. The number of times regressions have been picked up by a test bank before deployment to the UAT (user acceptance testing) system it pays for itself many times over. Patterns save time when an experienced group discusses design, but with developer turnover I get the feeling I have spent at least as much time explaining patterns to new developers as I have saved.
I don't think so. I think the vulnerabilities will ADD up. For example... 10 in IE, 10 in the Chrome plugin, and say around 5 in IE can be exploited even with the Chrome frame on. So a user running this plugin in IE would be vulnerable to 15, instead of just 10.
True but irrelevant. What matters is the number of exploits that occur only with the plugin and the number of exploits that only occur when it is not used (exploits of IE javascript engine, rendering, etc.) Those problems that occur anyway are not relevant to whether the plugin makes IE more or less secure.
Lets revisit this in a year's time. It will be interesting to see how many vulnerabilities are introduced by this compared to how many vulnerabilities in IE do not occur when browsing in a Chrome Frame. My guess is that it will be about even.
Slashdot Mirror
That's one reason why I probably would not make a good soldier. I once watched a news item about a US pilot who had accidentally attacked British ground troops (I think this was in Iraq). They played a cockpit recording of the incident where the pilot was told to abort a seccond attack. You could tell from the pilots voice he was shaken, he said "my God, what have I done". My first thought was how could he not feel the same way when attacking Iraqui troops too. These would also be men with families, probably enlisted without choice. Many of them would have little interest in the politics of the region. Some wife and kids would be left to grieve. When I said this I found that only one other person present thought they would feel the same way as me (fortunatley that was my wife!). I am not a pacifist but I think that most recent wars are unjustified. Even in necessary defense I would find killing other people very hard.
Any person who cannot complete basic maths, science, and an "English as a second language" qualification, more than likely GCSE, written in their own language, is denied entry.
It would be even better if they applied it to the chavs returning from booze cruises, Lanzarote, and Disney land.
Firstly, nationality is not the same as skin colour. Secondly, it's quite right to discriminate on any basis the country you are seeking to live in decides. Their country, they make the rules.
Every country should be able to set rules for immigrants. The problem is that some people want to apply them to second, third, or twenty-third generation immigrants, and to different racial, regional, ethnic, or religious groups native to the country. Look at all the people on this list complaining because of the proportion of "White British" declining.
to many simple minds - is the equivalent of "dirty foreigner" even if they are 3rd generation Brits...
True enough. My wife is American and to her surprise one of the neighbours tried to "recruit" her into the BNP complaining about some "foreigners" who had moved into the road.
She (bravely in my opinion) pointed out that she was the foreigner, having a US passport and not being a UK citizen, whereas the people who had moved into the road were born British. The racist neighbour litterally did not get it and said "yes but they are the foreign ones really", obviously equating nationality with skin colour even though it contradicted the facts.
For example, sex between castes would quickly lead to serious trouble with the woo fanatics.
Actually there isn't a religious injunction against this, just a social one because the children will generally be of the lower caste. In fact the Mahabharata mentions a king with a wife from each caste. This isn't to let Hinduism off totaly though, because there certainly is an injunction concerning dalits, and of sex outside marriage.
This is slashdot. Many people here might not like the judgement on Onan, as spilling semen is probably a regular habit.
holy shit... being Jewish is genetic now?! AWESOME!
You are quite correct, I should have said "of Semitic origins" or something like that
They just want SCIENCE to take away all that awful guilt.
The population of London is expected to drop below 50% English by 2012. Would you want to let that happen with your own capital?
Gosh, like just imagine if Washington DC had less than 50% Native Americans!
The population of London may or may not have more than 50% born abroad (though given the 2001 census figure of 24% that sounds unlikely), but that is not the same as them not being English, many are getting UK citizenship.
It might be more honest if the British Government were to just admit that it is catering to a common and wide streak of racism that persists, and just cart anyone who doesn't speak with a BBC accent off to a concentration camp.
Well it might be worth it to get rid of those Estury English chavs, but the UK would be pretty sparsely populated afterwards, particularly outside the City and Home Counties.
I think they are worried about a "Chrome Frame for Firefox" beating them in acid3, process per tab, performance, etc. They are getting the argument now so thay can say its the principle that's wrong, not sour grapes because they were pipped to the post.
They had a TV program last year when they did some genetic tests on people who considered themselves to be 100% English. I remember that out of 12 one had mitochondrial DNA that would have had his female line originating in Eastern Europe, one had Jewish ancestry and another Indian - and these were all people who did not know of any non-British relatives.
Add to that the millions of people who have known foreign ancestry but British citizenship and the whole idea becomes useless.
This is great news if you believe that Microsoft is pure evil and Google is goodness and light. I suspect that google will have their own lock-in however.
I can't believe that game manufacturers could get away with selling a game that would not play. They certainly would not in the UK (sales of goods act). Therefore the additions must be for extra features.
Because companies intentionally cripple games and then charge you extra to get the full game. THAT is why. When you pay for HBO, HBO doesn't leave out certain shows that you have to pay extra for or only show you 3/4 of an episode and you have to pay extra for the rest of the episode. When you buy a car, they don't sell you the car and then say "oh, well you have to pay another $5,000 if you want a FUEL tank. What? You want to be able to turn it on? Well that's another $4,500 for the ignition!" That kind of garbage is the problem with DLC.
No but they might offer alloy wheels, metalic paint, a sun roof, cruise control, built in GPS, a Carlos Fandango trim kit, and an upgraded stereo at extra cost. Is that so different?
I fucked your dead great grandmother while taking a dump on a gameboy color.
How dare you. The gameboy color is a valuable piece of history
Especially when Pakistan, India, and North Korea just got told "naughty boy" then it was business as usual.
Interesting comparison but the SQL test was a bit off testing a database installed on ext4, a journalling filesystem. Anyone wanting intensive database work would use ext3 for the DB partition.
Also, it would be interesting to see whether FreBSD still outperforms Linux in low-memory situations. This used to be an area where BSD had a clear advantage.
Wouldn't it be funny to see the wrecking company play hardball with the bank as payback.
100% coverage is usually overkill. You end up testing getters and setters, which really aren't necessary.
Also to test some exceptions might take more effort than the code itself and only cover something that will happen once a decade. For example coding to test an IOException in a read could be done by writing a mock File object that will throw an exception after a certain number of bytes are read, but then you have to parameterise your file type or use IOC or something and the extra complexity just isn't worth the benefit.
Agile, scrum, patterns, unit tests, etc. . Interesting ideas, but can anybody show me *any* significant, quantitative, comparative proof of improved ROI? . Software is about money guys.
From experience yes to unit tests. The number of times regressions have been picked up by a test bank before deployment to the UAT (user acceptance testing) system it pays for itself many times over. Patterns save time when an experienced group discusses design, but with developer turnover I get the feeling I have spent at least as much time explaining patterns to new developers as I have saved.
I thought it was only Apple fanboys who had to worry about getting their bots infected.
I don't think so. I think the vulnerabilities will ADD up. For example... 10 in IE, 10 in the Chrome plugin, and say around 5 in IE can be exploited even with the Chrome frame on. So a user running this plugin in IE would be vulnerable to 15, instead of just 10.
True but irrelevant. What matters is the number of exploits that occur only with the plugin and the number of exploits that only occur when it is not used (exploits of IE javascript engine, rendering, etc.) Those problems that occur anyway are not relevant to whether the plugin makes IE more or less secure.
Lets revisit this in a year's time. It will be interesting to see how many vulnerabilities are introduced by this compared to how many vulnerabilities in IE do not occur when browsing in a Chrome Frame. My guess is that it will be about even.
What do you expect; "This is great now our customers can access standards-compliant sites and have a faster, smoother web experience"?
You are an idiot.
Palm programmed the Pre to lie. How is this not morally reprehensible?
Well, it appears that in one case at least the Pre has passed the turing test. Naughty little computer!