And, the people who do find you are probably likely to share similar interests with you (history, drama, general nerdiness) or at least appreciate that side of you. Win-win all around, it sounds like.
I feel that if it makes him happy, and he feels content with the life he has, more power to him. Most people would love to have a life that makes them happy enough to be satisfied. For me, that's seeing my wife every day and hugging my kids, despite the stresses of raising a strong-willed (and totally awesome) child, but I can appreciate that that might not be for everyone.
There are many times when an anonymous function or class is the simplest, idiomatic (in the language in question) thing to do.
Event handlers in Java and GWT frequently are anonymous inner classes, but it often ends up being easier to read than writing a custom class that handles each different event, and each different event source. I've done both, and railed against the anonymous classes at first, but now that it's the idiom, it's what I use -- it makes my code more similar to most of the sample and reference code out there, which means that other developers are more likely to understand what's going on.
Similarly, consider that since he was typing it from memory, he may have taken shortcuts that he might not use in production code, just as one often writes a Perl one-liner differently than one would a Real Program. Adding meaningful variables, and avoiding return-time evaluations might easily be something one could to in real code. Look at what he wrote less as a sample of how one SHOULD do things, but more of a demonstration of the power of the toolkit / API.
You might be better off with a surgically implanted spike + extender. God knows how you'd ever manage to keep it sterile, let alone bind in the neural controls to make it work, but it's probably easier and simpler than growing bones plus muscles to extend things.
I realize this is almost completely off-topic, but thank you for mentioning your book. (I noticed it and was replying before I read far enough to see your sig.;)) I'd wanted to read it back when all that was out was the teaser bits, so now I've added it to my wish list so that I don't forget it. Is there a non-Kindle version? I normally prefer to read on my Nook, and am unaware of how easy it is to convert files. Does Amazon put any pressure on you to keep it in a Kindle format?
It's pretty neat to have such pertinent commentary as yours on topics like this. Thanks!
I have to reset my password every time I try to log into my ISP e-mail, because the passphrase is stored in my mail client normally. In theory, I could be using the account every day, and not remember the passphrase. Similarly, I can't remember my netflix passphrase.:(
Because physical evidence is not the same as testimony. You can be legally compelled to hand over your guns (even if doing so would be incriminating), and you can be forced to give the key or combination to a safe or safety deposit box. Hiding evidence is contempt for the court.
History has shown us that people are adept at trying to classify things in ever-more-restrictive or oppressive ways, to show some small percent improvement in some public official's record (on safety, on drunk driving busts, on revenu) or to suit some special group's agenda.
You can only be offended if you let someone else offend you. Other people might not find it offensive.
It's your choice whether to be offended by people calling you (or others) mean words, or to be offended by scatological humor, or by posters of "Praise Jesus for everything good in your life". Most of us reflexively DO feel offended, and are making an unconscious choice to do so.
There are people who feel offended when they hear adults say "damn", or "fuck". There are people who feel offended when they hear children say "damn", or "fuck". There are people who feel offended when they see people painting graffiti, or naked people, or taking naked photos, or anything else involving naked people. There are people who are offended that you'd teach your child to say "penis" rather than "thingy", or that you would read (or suggest that others read) things by controversial authors. There are people who feel offended because people with ${skin_color} live on their street.
Back to your original comment. If Bob is watching porn in the library, you can choose to look the other way, you can ask that they move, you can not go near that part of the library, and you can avoid going altogether. It seems like it's more of a business decision on the part of the library whether to have dedicated "privacy" areas for porn (or job searching, or blogging about controversial subjects) or not. Perhaps they're watching a documentary, or an instructional video that happens to also be porn.
Perhaps one would be better served developing a stronger sense of self, a thicker skin, and work on not being offended by others actions that are not malicious in nature.
Not to mention that I bet any participation in such phone calls is either already logged, or will be heavily logged in the future. I'm pretty sure phone calls are MUCH less anonymous than network packets, too, so I imagine that anyone doing so is unlikely to remain anonymous for long.
Giving your kid a Raspberry Pi, letting him hook in a keyboard and plug it all into the TV, and then get started programming makes it seem pretty compelling. Of course you might not be building large apps and games, but come on -- nearly every toy or educational program one might write will run just fine in an interpreted environment, and would likely compile very quickly.
Being able to run XBMC and hardware accelerated 3d graphics are neat, too, of course.
In the case where you've taken technical measures to ensure that it's impossible, I wonder if you'd be able to use an expert witness to show that it is indeed impossible.
US WILL let you back in without one, they'll just hassle you a bit more. It's a violation of pretty well established international law to refuse to admit your own citizens, with or without a passport. And it's not, from what I've been able to gather, a crime to reenter the US without a passport, so no penalty for doing so.
I submit that it might be very unwise to operate on that assumption.
The US has a history or saying that the constitution doesn't apply at borders or customs (as you're not *IN* the US yet, legally), that international treaties don't apply to certain people we've detained, and so on. I have no desire to pass through the US border in either direction, but if I did I would be damned certain I had my passport. You say "they'll just hassle you more", and I read, "They might detain, search, or hassle you for as long as they want, and confiscate whatever they feel like, and you'll have no recourse".
I want to laugh hard at that, except it's really sobering that not only do they seriously believe that they can do it, but I'll bet that within the next five years they'll try to patent something, or sue someone.
Slashdot Mirror
And, the people who do find you are probably likely to share similar interests with you (history, drama, general nerdiness) or at least appreciate that side of you. Win-win all around, it sounds like.
I feel that if it makes him happy, and he feels content with the life he has, more power to him. Most people would love to have a life that makes them happy enough to be satisfied. For me, that's seeing my wife every day and hugging my kids, despite the stresses of raising a strong-willed (and totally awesome) child, but I can appreciate that that might not be for everyone.
There are many times when an anonymous function or class is the simplest, idiomatic (in the language in question) thing to do.
Event handlers in Java and GWT frequently are anonymous inner classes, but it often ends up being easier to read than writing a custom class that handles each different event, and each different event source. I've done both, and railed against the anonymous classes at first, but now that it's the idiom, it's what I use -- it makes my code more similar to most of the sample and reference code out there, which means that other developers are more likely to understand what's going on.
Similarly, consider that since he was typing it from memory, he may have taken shortcuts that he might not use in production code, just as one often writes a Perl one-liner differently than one would a Real Program. Adding meaningful variables, and avoiding return-time evaluations might easily be something one could to in real code. Look at what he wrote less as a sample of how one SHOULD do things, but more of a demonstration of the power of the toolkit / API.
You might be better off with a surgically implanted spike + extender. God knows how you'd ever manage to keep it sterile, let alone bind in the neural controls to make it work, but it's probably easier and simpler than growing bones plus muscles to extend things.
I realize this is almost completely off-topic, but thank you for mentioning your book. (I noticed it and was replying before I read far enough to see your sig. ;)) I'd wanted to read it back when all that was out was the teaser bits, so now I've added it to my wish list so that I don't forget it. Is there a non-Kindle version? I normally prefer to read on my Nook, and am unaware of how easy it is to convert files. Does Amazon put any pressure on you to keep it in a Kindle format?
It's pretty neat to have such pertinent commentary as yours on topics like this. Thanks!
I have to reset my password every time I try to log into my ISP e-mail, because the passphrase is stored in my mail client normally. In theory, I could be using the account every day, and not remember the passphrase. Similarly, I can't remember my netflix passphrase. :(
Because physical evidence is not the same as testimony. You can be legally compelled to hand over your guns (even if doing so would be incriminating), and you can be forced to give the key or combination to a safe or safety deposit box. Hiding evidence is contempt for the court.
How would you remember it long enough to use them? It seems ... inconvenient.
I don't know more than to say, "Contempt charges are different". From what I've read, it's somewhat at the whim of the judge.
How do you restore it, in case of failure?
History has shown us that people are adept at trying to classify things in ever-more-restrictive or oppressive ways, to show some small percent improvement in some public official's record (on safety, on drunk driving busts, on revenu) or to suit some special group's agenda.
You can only be offended if you let someone else offend you. Other people might not find it offensive.
It's your choice whether to be offended by people calling you (or others) mean words, or to be offended by scatological humor, or by posters of "Praise Jesus for everything good in your life". Most of us reflexively DO feel offended, and are making an unconscious choice to do so.
There are people who feel offended when they hear adults say "damn", or "fuck". There are people who feel offended when they hear children say "damn", or "fuck". There are people who feel offended when they see people painting graffiti, or naked people, or taking naked photos, or anything else involving naked people. There are people who are offended that you'd teach your child to say "penis" rather than "thingy", or that you would read (or suggest that others read) things by controversial authors. There are people who feel offended because people with ${skin_color} live on their street.
Back to your original comment. If Bob is watching porn in the library, you can choose to look the other way, you can ask that they move, you can not go near that part of the library, and you can avoid going altogether. It seems like it's more of a business decision on the part of the library whether to have dedicated "privacy" areas for porn (or job searching, or blogging about controversial subjects) or not. Perhaps they're watching a documentary, or an instructional video that happens to also be porn.
Perhaps one would be better served developing a stronger sense of self, a thicker skin, and work on not being offended by others actions that are not malicious in nature.
Not to mention that I bet any participation in such phone calls is either already logged, or will be heavily logged in the future. I'm pretty sure phone calls are MUCH less anonymous than network packets, too, so I imagine that anyone doing so is unlikely to remain anonymous for long.
It all depends on how much money is offered, I suspect.
Or, the hypothetical ICAA could start their own music label, I suppose....
Given most people's experience on what works at dissuading bullies, I suspect he meant a very literal LART.
Giving your kid a Raspberry Pi, letting him hook in a keyboard and plug it all into the TV, and then get started programming makes it seem pretty compelling. Of course you might not be building large apps and games, but come on -- nearly every toy or educational program one might write will run just fine in an interpreted environment, and would likely compile very quickly.
Being able to run XBMC and hardware accelerated 3d graphics are neat, too, of course.
I think that might attract non-machine attention though, when they tell their security guards to turn away clowns and Lady Gaga impersonators. ;)
This can be easily simulated with a hosts file that points at it (or at a local web server instance serving the same thing).
In the case where you've taken technical measures to ensure that it's impossible, I wonder if you'd be able to use an expert witness to show that it is indeed impossible.
Yes, but I don't really see how the two are related. How does a chart of wood-grain colors at all relate to "you might be a ___"?
US WILL let you back in without one, they'll just hassle you a bit more. It's a violation of pretty well established international law to refuse to admit your own citizens, with or without a passport. And it's not, from what I've been able to gather, a crime to reenter the US without a passport, so no penalty for doing so.
I submit that it might be very unwise to operate on that assumption.
The US has a history or saying that the constitution doesn't apply at borders or customs (as you're not *IN* the US yet, legally), that international treaties don't apply to certain people we've detained, and so on. I have no desire to pass through the US border in either direction, but if I did I would be damned certain I had my passport. You say "they'll just hassle you more", and I read, "They might detain, search, or hassle you for as long as they want, and confiscate whatever they feel like, and you'll have no recourse".
Wouldn't you be able to do that by weighing it down enough that it would be insufficiently buoyant once it gets to less-dense altitudes of air?
Perhaps we can judge him based on the benefit he's had for the world, even if it may have been done with a selfish motive.
I want to laugh hard at that, except it's really sobering that not only do they seriously believe that they can do it, but I'll bet that within the next five years they'll try to patent something, or sue someone.
Well, that and there's a movie that looks to be basically the same, though the mission number differs:
http://apollo18movie.net/