It's like saying driving a car instead of walking is "cosmetic transportation". Something whose main purpose is to provide functionality is pretty much the exact opposite of "cosmetic".
Version 9 or 10 or so. I don't remember exactly why I thought, as someone new to Linux, that going with Slackware instead of something else would be a good idea, but the first thing I did was try to get it set up. And the second, and the third, and so on. Eventually I managed to get a nice little GNOME desktop running, and learned a fair bit along the way. Including that managing software under Linux without a proper package management system can be kind of annoying, and having up-to-date software is nice on a desktop, so I went on to other distros for various periods of time, including Debian, Gentoo, Ubuntu, Debian again, and even a brief stint with FreeBSD somewhere along the way. Currently using Arch, and have been for the past couple of years.
How the fucking hell did this shit get modded up? They're not censoring fucking pornography here. Websites of groups working for equality in rights for minorities aren't "indoctrination" or "mush" by any definition of the words. And given that they're not censoring anti-gay sites, it's obvious they're not even trying to protect the poor children from the concept of homosexuality (Not that they could. The schools certainly aren't their only source of information.). They're just trying to prevent it from being portrayed as anything but some horrible terrible sinful thing that if you think is normal you're a monster, and if you happen to be gay, well you should just kill yourself immediately for the good of society.
When did Slashdot turn into some moralistic, closed-minded religious asshat website?
Time for a mature, enlightened debate on climate change, by people with thorough knowledge of the field who don't parrot long-discredited bullshit at all! I do so enjoy these discussions. They're almost as intelligent as Slashdot discussions on economics.
They have no obligation to let Amazon make changes they dislike and not complain about them. It may be that they could buy from somewhere else that doesn't pull such bullshit instead of (or in addition to) complaining; but again, it's up to them to decide.
Your theory is interesting and all, but (and I know this may be a shocking concept for a Slashdot user) the actual article says what actually happened, and it's not at all like that.
In the past six months, that location experienced 1,380 crimes--4 percent of all crimes mapped--or roughly eight a day.
The crimes were real, but a coding error with the system's geocoding--the process of converting addresses into map points--caused the crimes to be represented at a default location, according to a report Sunday in the Los Angeles Times.
And because of this insignificant little incident that killed nobody, and had little to no effect on the health of people near it, nuclear power, a safe, clean, mature power generation technology, was (and continues to be) drastically set back. It's stuff like this that makes me worried that humanity as a whole will be just too incredibly stupid to make it through this century without killing ourselves in one of many ways.
-adjective 1. ascribing human form or attributes to a being or thing not human, esp. to a deity. 2. resembling or made to resemble a human form: an anthropomorphic carving.
Quoth Ars Technica's article on this same thing (which was updated well before Slashdot's was posted):
A Google spokesperson tells Ars, "We inadvertently unpublished the applications for all carriers, and today we have corrected the problem so that all Android Market users outside the T-Mobile US network will now have access to the applications. We have notified the affected developers."
And while I'm sure some people will complain about it being blocked to anyone at all, the fault here lies with T-Mobile. While it'd be nice if Google could dictate terms as it pleased to the carriers, I somehow don't think that'd go over too well. And on top of that, you don't even *need* to get software from the Android Market to install it (insert jab at iPhone here).
I more dread the day we think questionable logic, misrepresenting the facts, and outright lying to support our personal agenda counts as 'questioning ourselves', because it is sadly already here.
You're not being 'pedantic', you're being 'incorrect'. How do you think they get fancy effects like "being able to look at things from any angle"? It is actually 3D, even if it's rendered in 2D for display on the screen.
Wow, you're impressively retarded. They didn't say "we disagreed with the GPL and decided to make our own license that by necessity of said disagreements ended up GPL-incompatible", they said that GPL-incompatibility *itself* was a goal, not a side effect of design choices of the license. There's really no way to look at it that does not make Sun look like a bunch of childish assholes.
(And if all they cared about was not having some of the GPL's restrictions, they could've easily went with another license that *is* GPL-compatible.)
The reason the iPhone isn't taking off as well in Japan is the kanji support
Well that'd make sen-
Kanji input on the iPhone is as good as the other cell phones.
Wait, what? Did you mean to say it isn't as good as with other phones? Because that'd make a lot more sense. (And if so, I'm curious as to what exactly is wrong with it; I don't even have an iPhone, let alone input Japanese with one)
"Fruitful"? You started off with severely flawed analogies and anti-intellectualism, and then somehow managed to continue downhill from there, and rather steeply downhill too. It's not possible to have a "fruitful" conversation on this sort of subject with a person who can't even manage to build the flimsiest of arguments, and tries to pull off such bullshit. Nice try with the "Oh one as mighty as I wouldn't stoop to such measures as you have!" attitude, but you've continued to respond with no actual argument and tactics which would make even a politician a little bit ashamed. To put it bluntly, you aren't worth the effort of mature, intelligent discussion.
I never said there's no side-effects for non-alternative medicine, and I'm hardly deluding myself on anything. The difference is that, in addition to the harmful side-effects, real medicine generally has beneficial effects, which "alternative medicine" is a tad bit lacking in.
Oh please. You're down to the level of "yes well I may have said something that stops just a hair short of explicitly saying that, and there's no reason to have said that unless I wanted to imply such a thing, and no reasonable person would take it any other way, and even few unreasonable people would take it any other way, but I certainly didn't mean it that way"? The quality of discussion on Slashdot really has dropped. I've seen trolls who made more sound arguments on such matters; this is like arguing with a *child*, and not a particularly bright one.
Yes, "copyright experts" and "economists" would have made a more logically sound analogy. But the way I put it is rhetorically more effective and, hey Ciceronian triplets are fun!
See, this is the problem. "Rhetorically effective" bullshit is still bullshit, and piling it on doesn't make you and less wrong.
More fun than plainly stating the point which you are being willfully blind to: "Climate scientists have an economically-motivated bias to come up with findings that are more likely to spur funding for continued research in their field."
Sure, let's plainly state things. Like "you're an idiot". I have an "economically-motivated bias" to go an rob banks. Quite noticeably, I am not going around robbing banks. "foo is possible" is *not* a solid argument. You need to show evidence that it's actually happening.
Yes, just like the overwhelming majority of M.D.s oppose "alternative medicine".
And quite reasonably; it's almost exclusively utter bullshit. And not taking *real medicine* when you have a serious condition is a very fucking bad thing. Moreover, some of this 'medicine' is itself harmful.
Just like the overwhelming majority of "artists" support copyright. Just like the overwhelming majority of bankers support the bailout.
These two 'analogies' are just plain wrong. The relationship between "climate" and "climate scientists" is "thing" and "experts on thing", and same with "medicine" and "doctors". For these two, however, the relationship is "thing" and "people affected by thing". Less nonsensical analogies would instead use "copyright experts" and "economists". Unfortunately, this, while more correct, doesn't induce nearly as much rage (and thus indirectly support for your position) in the average Slashdotter, so I suppose it's reasonable you didn't use them instead. Not that it would've mattered anyway; you don't really have any sort of solid argument, just blatant anti-intellectualism.
Their argument is that by breaking MySpace's TOS she is gaining unauthorized access to the site (i.e., hacking it), and can be charged for that. If you don't see why this is a very bad thing, and can't be bothered to RTFA, I'll quote the relevant bits for you:
The EFF says that a MySpace user doesn't gain unauthorized access to MySpace's servers by disregarding the ToS, which is what the DoJ's reading of the CFAA would criminalize. Additionally, the groups argue that the legislative history of the CFAA supports the view that it's meant to prevent trespass and theft on computers or computer networks, not improper motives or use. The EFF and CDT believe that holding Drew criminally liable for violating MySpace's ToS would be an "extraordinary and dangerous extension of federal criminal law," as it would turn practically everyone into federal criminals.
They point out that even checking out the popular dating site Match.com for the mere purpose of research into this case would have turned the brief's author into a criminal, as she is married and the ToS prohibits those who are not single or separated from using the site. "[T]he Government's theory would attach criminal penalties to minors under the age of 18 who use the Google search engine, as well as to many individuals who legitimately exercise their First Amendment rights to speak anonymously online," adds the brief. Although the groups agree that Meier's death was a tragedy and that there is a heavy desire to hold Drew accountable for her actions, they believe the First Amendment rights of citizens outweigh the "overbroad" interpretation of the CFAA in order to prosecute her, and urge the court to dismiss the indictment.
Wrong. Any decent editor can automatically indent code for you in any langauge where the proper indentation can be unambiguously defined by applying a series of rules to some other set of constructs in the language. This works for any language that has an unambiguous block structure even in the absence of any significance given to different whitespace patterns, which is true of lots and lots of languages, but, notably, not Python.
Sorry, I should've been more clear on this. I meant automatically indenting as you type, not automatically indenting an existing file. (Though you *can* automatically indent a Python file, in much the same way you can automatically add or remove braces in some cases in languages that use them. It's not a very useful operation in either case since all you can really do with it is use it to standardize on a single style for code, but it's possible.)
or after manually doing something that destroys the existing indentation for some reason, and all you need to do then is to tell your editor to automatically indent the line or region of code, and your are back to okay.
If something destroys the delimiters for some reason, you're just as fucked as you'd be in Python if you lost your indentation. (To be fair, this doesn't happen as often as losing indentation. (To be fair, the most common reason for loss of indentation is by far putting it in HTML without using an element that doesn't collapse runs of whitespace, in which case it's your own damn fault.))
Copying and pasting code in a language where block structure is indicated by indentation alone usually requires selecting the code and then manually adding or deleting the right number of indentation steps to match the intended meaning of the code. This isn't a lot more burdensome, but it is clearly at least slightly more burdensome.
It's no more burdensome than the automatic indentation you'd have to apply in a language that uses braces (at least, assuming you're using a decent editor). In vim, all I need to do to indent pasted code is use ]p instead of p or [p instead of P when I paste it, and it automatically gets adjusted to the current indentation level. That's a single extra key stroke, which you'd at least need to tell it to indent the code appropriately for you with other languages. (Of course, you could tell it to automatically indent the file whenever you paste text, but that's not a good idea for various reasons)
They're just delimited with indentation instead of braces. And it's not the language that is stupid, it's you, because you are apparently not indenting your code at all, or you'd realize that indented code in other languages "Fs up" (you do realize you can say "fuck" on Slashdot, right? Watch: Fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck. It's pretty cool.) stuff just as much as indented Python code does. Any decent editor can automatically indent code for you in any language, and in this case Python is even easier because all it uses is the indentation, so you don't have to manually add additional delimiters in the appropriate places; just indent as usual. Copying and pasting code in any language requires you to reindent it just as much as with Python, lest it become an unreadable mess, and again, any decent editor provides the ability to adjust the indentation of whole blocks of text with ease. And if you find yourself utterly stumped by the challenge of generating properly indented code, you simply should not be programming.
Machine translation sucks. Among other things, idioms, set phrases, wordplay, and most importantly the fact that there is rarely a one-to-one mapping between languages (often resulting in either a loss of information or requiring missing information to be added, which often requires knowledge of the culture of the language's people) all present challenges that make it unlikely that anything short of human-like AI (or very close) will be able to do good translations. Or to put it more briefly, "Nothing to see here. Please move along."
Slashdot Mirror
It's like saying driving a car instead of walking is "cosmetic transportation". Something whose main purpose is to provide functionality is pretty much the exact opposite of "cosmetic".
Version 9 or 10 or so. I don't remember exactly why I thought, as someone new to Linux, that going with Slackware instead of something else would be a good idea, but the first thing I did was try to get it set up. And the second, and the third, and so on. Eventually I managed to get a nice little GNOME desktop running, and learned a fair bit along the way. Including that managing software under Linux without a proper package management system can be kind of annoying, and having up-to-date software is nice on a desktop, so I went on to other distros for various periods of time, including Debian, Gentoo, Ubuntu, Debian again, and even a brief stint with FreeBSD somewhere along the way. Currently using Arch, and have been for the past couple of years.
How the fucking hell did this shit get modded up? They're not censoring fucking pornography here. Websites of groups working for equality in rights for minorities aren't "indoctrination" or "mush" by any definition of the words. And given that they're not censoring anti-gay sites, it's obvious they're not even trying to protect the poor children from the concept of homosexuality (Not that they could. The schools certainly aren't their only source of information.). They're just trying to prevent it from being portrayed as anything but some horrible terrible sinful thing that if you think is normal you're a monster, and if you happen to be gay, well you should just kill yourself immediately for the good of society.
When did Slashdot turn into some moralistic, closed-minded religious asshat website?
Time for a mature, enlightened debate on climate change, by people with thorough knowledge of the field who don't parrot long-discredited bullshit at all! I do so enjoy these discussions. They're almost as intelligent as Slashdot discussions on economics.
Do not look into website with remaining eye.
They have no obligation to let Amazon make changes they dislike and not complain about them. It may be that they could buy from somewhere else that doesn't pull such bullshit instead of (or in addition to) complaining; but again, it's up to them to decide.
Your theory is interesting and all, but (and I know this may be a shocking concept for a Slashdot user) the actual article says what actually happened, and it's not at all like that.
And because of this insignificant little incident that killed nobody, and had little to no effect on the health of people near it, nuclear power, a safe, clean, mature power generation technology, was (and continues to be) drastically set back. It's stuff like this that makes me worried that humanity as a whole will be just too incredibly stupid to make it through this century without killing ourselves in one of many ways.
The word you were looking for is "anthropogenic".
Quoth Ars Technica's article on this same thing (which was updated well before Slashdot's was posted):
And while I'm sure some people will complain about it being blocked to anyone at all, the fault here lies with T-Mobile. While it'd be nice if Google could dictate terms as it pleased to the carriers, I somehow don't think that'd go over too well. And on top of that, you don't even *need* to get software from the Android Market to install it (insert jab at iPhone here).
I more dread the day we think questionable logic, misrepresenting the facts, and outright lying to support our personal agenda counts as 'questioning ourselves', because it is sadly already here.
You're not being 'pedantic', you're being 'incorrect'. How do you think they get fancy effects like "being able to look at things from any angle"? It is actually 3D, even if it's rendered in 2D for display on the screen.
Wow, you're impressively retarded. They didn't say "we disagreed with the GPL and decided to make our own license that by necessity of said disagreements ended up GPL-incompatible", they said that GPL-incompatibility *itself* was a goal, not a side effect of design choices of the license. There's really no way to look at it that does not make Sun look like a bunch of childish assholes.
(And if all they cared about was not having some of the GPL's restrictions, they could've easily went with another license that *is* GPL-compatible.)
Well that'd make sen-
Wait, what? Did you mean to say it isn't as good as with other phones? Because that'd make a lot more sense. (And if so, I'm curious as to what exactly is wrong with it; I don't even have an iPhone, let alone input Japanese with one)
"Fruitful"? You started off with severely flawed analogies and anti-intellectualism, and then somehow managed to continue downhill from there, and rather steeply downhill too. It's not possible to have a "fruitful" conversation on this sort of subject with a person who can't even manage to build the flimsiest of arguments, and tries to pull off such bullshit. Nice try with the "Oh one as mighty as I wouldn't stoop to such measures as you have!" attitude, but you've continued to respond with no actual argument and tactics which would make even a politician a little bit ashamed. To put it bluntly, you aren't worth the effort of mature, intelligent discussion.
I never said there's no side-effects for non-alternative medicine, and I'm hardly deluding myself on anything. The difference is that, in addition to the harmful side-effects, real medicine generally has beneficial effects, which "alternative medicine" is a tad bit lacking in.
Oh please. You're down to the level of "yes well I may have said something that stops just a hair short of explicitly saying that, and there's no reason to have said that unless I wanted to imply such a thing, and no reasonable person would take it any other way, and even few unreasonable people would take it any other way, but I certainly didn't mean it that way"? The quality of discussion on Slashdot really has dropped. I've seen trolls who made more sound arguments on such matters; this is like arguing with a *child*, and not a particularly bright one.
See, this is the problem. "Rhetorically effective" bullshit is still bullshit, and piling it on doesn't make you and less wrong.
Sure, let's plainly state things. Like "you're an idiot". I have an "economically-motivated bias" to go an rob banks. Quite noticeably, I am not going around robbing banks. "foo is possible" is *not* a solid argument. You need to show evidence that it's actually happening.
And quite reasonably; it's almost exclusively utter bullshit. And not taking *real medicine* when you have a serious condition is a very fucking bad thing. Moreover, some of this 'medicine' is itself harmful.
These two 'analogies' are just plain wrong. The relationship between "climate" and "climate scientists" is "thing" and "experts on thing", and same with "medicine" and "doctors". For these two, however, the relationship is "thing" and "people affected by thing". Less nonsensical analogies would instead use "copyright experts" and "economists". Unfortunately, this, while more correct, doesn't induce nearly as much rage (and thus indirectly support for your position) in the average Slashdotter, so I suppose it's reasonable you didn't use them instead. Not that it would've mattered anyway; you don't really have any sort of solid argument, just blatant anti-intellectualism.
That's not a fair comparison at all.
They didn't even have rounded corners back then.
This is truly an impressive development! Since when have there been so many humans capable of asexual reproduction?
Their argument is that by breaking MySpace's TOS she is gaining unauthorized access to the site (i.e., hacking it), and can be charged for that. If you don't see why this is a very bad thing, and can't be bothered to RTFA, I'll quote the relevant bits for you:
Sorry, I should've been more clear on this. I meant automatically indenting as you type, not automatically indenting an existing file. (Though you *can* automatically indent a Python file, in much the same way you can automatically add or remove braces in some cases in languages that use them. It's not a very useful operation in either case since all you can really do with it is use it to standardize on a single style for code, but it's possible.)
If something destroys the delimiters for some reason, you're just as fucked as you'd be in Python if you lost your indentation. (To be fair, this doesn't happen as often as losing indentation. (To be fair, the most common reason for loss of indentation is by far putting it in HTML without using an element that doesn't collapse runs of whitespace, in which case it's your own damn fault.))
It's no more burdensome than the automatic indentation you'd have to apply in a language that uses braces (at least, assuming you're using a decent editor). In vim, all I need to do to indent pasted code is use ]p instead of p or [p instead of P when I paste it, and it automatically gets adjusted to the current indentation level. That's a single extra key stroke, which you'd at least need to tell it to indent the code appropriately for you with other languages. (Of course, you could tell it to automatically indent the file whenever you paste text, but that's not a good idea for various reasons)
They're just delimited with indentation instead of braces. And it's not the language that is stupid, it's you, because you are apparently not indenting your code at all, or you'd realize that indented code in other languages "Fs up" (you do realize you can say "fuck" on Slashdot, right? Watch: Fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck. It's pretty cool.) stuff just as much as indented Python code does. Any decent editor can automatically indent code for you in any language, and in this case Python is even easier because all it uses is the indentation, so you don't have to manually add additional delimiters in the appropriate places; just indent as usual. Copying and pasting code in any language requires you to reindent it just as much as with Python, lest it become an unreadable mess, and again, any decent editor provides the ability to adjust the indentation of whole blocks of text with ease. And if you find yourself utterly stumped by the challenge of generating properly indented code, you simply should not be programming.
Machine translation sucks. Among other things, idioms, set phrases, wordplay, and most importantly the fact that there is rarely a one-to-one mapping between languages (often resulting in either a loss of information or requiring missing information to be added, which often requires knowledge of the culture of the language's people) all present challenges that make it unlikely that anything short of human-like AI (or very close) will be able to do good translations. Or to put it more briefly, "Nothing to see here. Please move along."