Hamer v. Sidway - just called up my casebrief and it is the one I was thinking of when you said it. I don't think it's funny at all - some poor kid got duped into behaving well and had to take it to court to get a dime for it. Family members are so much more generous before they die.
Do you mean "older case" as in "case written entirely in Latin abbreviations," like "I. de S. and Wife v. W. de. S."?;)
My property casebook and professor are too touchy-feely for my taste. I actually was considered a racist for a while because I took up the misunderstood and ignored majority position in Dred Scott in that class, and the professor doesn't believe in attacking students. Of course, in the third week of law school, few students know how to think like lawyers and even fewer can come back to earth and argue against such a heinously politically incorrect position, so people just assumed I personally agreed with the argument I made. Oops!;)
Pierson is a great case. You have all the elements of a good Disney movie... You have a guy in New York, out hunting foxes with his hounds. As a fox is under chase, another guy shoots the fox and claims it as his own. And they take it to the highest court in New York State! And people think we're overly litigious now!;)
There are people capable of producing news in a timely manner without nearly the writing and editing deficiencies suffered by Slashdot and other technology news sources. Business news comes to mind, as does legal news.
We're smart people - we just can't seem to find anyone with an English degree to write for us.
My response was at the meta level. Look at other tech news - not just Slashdot - and you'll find that it tends to be poorly written. Maybe all news is like that these days, but it seems to me that tech has it the worst.
I got the bad pun in the title. It was just that: a bad pun. An example of a good pun used as a headline is "Fertile Woman Dies in Climax." (Fertile and Climax are two rural MN towns.) I got it - but didn't laugh. And note that I was responding to someone who didn't get it at all but raises a good question: are there decent editors in the entire dang field?
The problem isn't the material. It's that I got behind because I had a cold and the prof. is entirely disorganized about which order it gets covered in. So I'm trying to figure out what to read, and then find time to read it.
Plus, I like Property better. Who can forget Pierson v. Post, the case of the saucy intruder? Or Torts, where my professor grilled me so much one day that I couldn't answer who my favorite singer was because I couldn't cite precedent (I really drew a blank and refused to answer that question after 20 minutes about Lumley v. Gye.):P
Face it - tech news is the field for people who really sucked at both technical writing and journalism. You're not going to find the best writers aspiring to be techno-journalists.
The 73rd Amendment is the one prohibiting contrived acronyms over 6 letters in length. It's part of the Bill of Jokes. My constitution is evidently better than yours if you can't seem to find it.:)
I wish I could mod you +1: Correct. But can you cite the mackerel case? Tonight is my busy reading night and I'd like to skim that one for some humor when I finish catching up in Contracts.;)
IANALY (IAALS), and although the judgment (note the spelling - I'm sure you've seen that word before;-D) is only a binding precedent in this judge's jurisdiction, it seems to me that it'd prove useful persuasive precedent in other districts.
The 9th Circuit may rule another direction (too bad CA can't just have its own Circuit to end their domination of the sane states in the 9th), but I think other courts would find this ruling convincing. It certainly feels sound on the surface - the Patriot Act is one of the few things I really fault Bush for.
No, but calling it the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act is the problem. It's unconstitutional to use contrived acronyms more than 6 letters in length. (US Const., Amendment 73)
High-level vs. low-level isn't a dichotomy, it's a continuum. At the lowest level you input raw machine code, and you move up through assembly (which was, at one time, very high level), and then to procedural languages like Fortran and C, and then it all branches out but there are languages like Python and Ruby that are higher-level than C, and eventually you get to Lisp which is an extremely high-level language.
Object-orientation is just a language feature, it's not a true indicator of the level at which a language exists, but typically it provides a boost to the level of a language. C, Objective-C, and C++ are each slightly higher-level than the last, but only slightly. It's other standard features (iostream, STL, etc.) that make the language truly higher-level.
The level of a language also depends on what you measure that level relative to. One way to look at it is to ask how far above the machine you are. In assembler, you aren't very far off the hardware. Every instruction is tailored to the hardware. But you can also measure relative to the OS. In C, you are farther from the hardware itself, but low-level to the operating system - you have to tailor your code to the OS it will run on.
This sounds like a magic laser beam - ironically, my eyes are too dry to bother reading the story, but it seems to me it'd be hard to aim a laser from the ground in a way that would hit a pilot's eyes in the cockpit if the plane is even 100ft AGL, much less around FL300.
Slashdot Mirror
Hamer v. Sidway - just called up my casebrief and it is the one I was thinking of when you said it. I don't think it's funny at all - some poor kid got duped into behaving well and had to take it to court to get a dime for it. Family members are so much more generous before they die.
Al Gore invented the Internet, but I'm not sure if he knows how to use it, so I don't know if I trust the English with the language. ;)
Uh-oh...that actually violates amendments 73 and 107, which prohibits changing what USA stands for.
If you hate Tk and want to forget Tcl, I recommend Ruby/Tk. The tutorial web page is almost as ugly as the output!
Do you mean "older case" as in "case written entirely in Latin abbreviations," like "I. de S. and Wife v. W. de. S."? ;)
;)
My property casebook and professor are too touchy-feely for my taste. I actually was considered a racist for a while because I took up the misunderstood and ignored majority position in Dred Scott in that class, and the professor doesn't believe in attacking students. Of course, in the third week of law school, few students know how to think like lawyers and even fewer can come back to earth and argue against such a heinously politically incorrect position, so people just assumed I personally agreed with the argument I made. Oops!
If there were legal secretaries posting on Slashdot, I'd find them and either pound their wussy asses or pound their...well, never mind. ;-D
Maybe because it's an old dupe, Luke!
Pierson is a great case. You have all the elements of a good Disney movie... You have a guy in New York, out hunting foxes with his hounds. As a fox is under chase, another guy shoots the fox and claims it as his own. And they take it to the highest court in New York State! And people think we're overly litigious now! ;)
There are people capable of producing news in a timely manner without nearly the writing and editing deficiencies suffered by Slashdot and other technology news sources. Business news comes to mind, as does legal news.
We're smart people - we just can't seem to find anyone with an English degree to write for us.
My response was at the meta level. Look at other tech news - not just Slashdot - and you'll find that it tends to be poorly written. Maybe all news is like that these days, but it seems to me that tech has it the worst.
I got the bad pun in the title. It was just that: a bad pun. An example of a good pun used as a headline is "Fertile Woman Dies in Climax." (Fertile and Climax are two rural MN towns.) I got it - but didn't laugh. And note that I was responding to someone who didn't get it at all but raises a good question: are there decent editors in the entire dang field?
I'm so glad that this critical speculation has made the front page of Slashdot.
The problem isn't the material. It's that I got behind because I had a cold and the prof. is entirely disorganized about which order it gets covered in. So I'm trying to figure out what to read, and then find time to read it.
:P
Plus, I like Property better. Who can forget Pierson v. Post, the case of the saucy intruder? Or Torts, where my professor grilled me so much one day that I couldn't answer who my favorite singer was because I couldn't cite precedent (I really drew a blank and refused to answer that question after 20 minutes about Lumley v. Gye.)
I'm a citizen because I keep and bear arms. You've got me confused with a "subject."
Do we have editors over here?
Face it - tech news is the field for people who really sucked at both technical writing and journalism. You're not going to find the best writers aspiring to be techno-journalists.
The 73rd Amendment is the one prohibiting contrived acronyms over 6 letters in length. It's part of the Bill of Jokes. My constitution is evidently better than yours if you can't seem to find it. :)
S = student, not soon. Trust me, it doesn't feel like "soon" at all. :P
I wish I could mod you +1: Correct. But can you cite the mackerel case? Tonight is my busy reading night and I'd like to skim that one for some humor when I finish catching up in Contracts. ;)
You're just bitter because you're 380 places away from 4 digits.
I don't know whether to feel sorry for you or disgusted by your existance.
I suggest the former - you can at least spell that one.
IANALY (IAALS), and although the judgment (note the spelling - I'm sure you've seen that word before ;-D) is only a binding precedent in this judge's jurisdiction, it seems to me that it'd prove useful persuasive precedent in other districts.
The 9th Circuit may rule another direction (too bad CA can't just have its own Circuit to end their domination of the sane states in the 9th), but I think other courts would find this ruling convincing. It certainly feels sound on the surface - the Patriot Act is one of the few things I really fault Bush for.
No, but calling it the P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act is the problem. It's unconstitutional to use contrived acronyms more than 6 letters in length. (US Const., Amendment 73)
You didn't cite any examples of weak dynamic typing, like Tcl. Don't forget Tcl!
High-level vs. low-level isn't a dichotomy, it's a continuum. At the lowest level you input raw machine code, and you move up through assembly (which was, at one time, very high level), and then to procedural languages like Fortran and C, and then it all branches out but there are languages like Python and Ruby that are higher-level than C, and eventually you get to Lisp which is an extremely high-level language.
Object-orientation is just a language feature, it's not a true indicator of the level at which a language exists, but typically it provides a boost to the level of a language. C, Objective-C, and C++ are each slightly higher-level than the last, but only slightly. It's other standard features (iostream, STL, etc.) that make the language truly higher-level.
The level of a language also depends on what you measure that level relative to. One way to look at it is to ask how far above the machine you are. In assembler, you aren't very far off the hardware. Every instruction is tailored to the hardware. But you can also measure relative to the OS. In C, you are farther from the hardware itself, but low-level to the operating system - you have to tailor your code to the OS it will run on.
This sounds like a magic laser beam - ironically, my eyes are too dry to bother reading the story, but it seems to me it'd be hard to aim a laser from the ground in a way that would hit a pilot's eyes in the cockpit if the plane is even 100ft AGL, much less around FL300.