In Orwell's future you could support the Party. With this law, if I go onto a Democratic Party message board and post that Bush is the greatest thing Evar I can get 2 years in jail. I can get 2 years in jail for liking the government! WTF?!
Re:Whatever.
on
Demise of C++?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
Better and more efficient than template metaprogramming: Lisp programming with declare statements indicating the places where type guarantees can be made.
Re:We just got tired of being insulted
on
Demise of C++?
·
· Score: 1
Be happy. When Object Pascal (a language a little itty bit cleaner than C++, but mostly just nicer looking) programmers mention what we code in we're laughed out of the room, because everyone still thinks "Pascal" means the language invented by Wirth in the early '70s.
You, you use C++, which may be on somewhat of a decline thanks to its children Java and C#, but is still considered a "real language".
Re:C++ has its place
on
Demise of C++?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
You're forgetting one:
Common Lisp - Fast nowadays, powerful, flexible, but everyone ignores it.
I see a problem with your model: The skill of programmers is distributed by the motivation, practice and experience they put into their craft, not by a random statistically normal function. If people try hard enough they tend to achieve the level of skill that can be called guru.
I'm really hoping that these "papers" end up being serious material about new technologies which run on Linux, rather than another 100 papers on "Why Linux Should Do as I Say to Achieve World Domination".
That would have been too obvious. Instead, they created the public school system, the "experts" that are always on CNN telling us how to live, and other general means of convincing people to take their freedom and use it for exactly what they are told to do.
Wrong. Evolutionary biology is the only theory making any progress towards understanding nature that: 1.Predicts immutable and universal behaviors and laws, 2.Does so with the assumption that all phenonmena are either probabalistic or deterministic.
However, those two ideas tend not to be proven wrong.
I argue the same because in a world where every person has a different moral system the only way to ensure that the correct morals are ever followed by anyone is to give people the right to decide their own morality. From that the entire rights system flows.
A corporation shall act in the way its charter prescribes, for that is its genetic code. Change the charter, and perhaps you shall get a better corporation.
As long as it doesn't turn into a partisan political mouthpiece like "Family Guy" has. If I want to see one-sided political humor, I'll read "Doonesbury."
You seem to have misspelled "American Dad" and "The Boondocks".
So what if the voting machine changes my vote to be for George W. Bush and then prints out that tampered version on paper, when in fact I voted for Dennis Kucinich?
What would really be nice for secure voting would be a system of encrypted voting. Everyone writes their vote to a small disk or USB dongle twice: once cleartext, once encrypted with a public key. On Election Day the dongle is plugged into the open-source voting machine, which increments the vote-count of the appropriate candidate based on the cleartext version and associates the encrypted vote in a database with the voter's identity.
If at any point the vote needs to be verified or the voter contests the way their vote was registered said voter simply decrypts their encrypted vote with the necessary private key. Doing so violates the principle of the secret ballot, but unfortunately that's what must be done in order to verify that a vote was registered correctly, unless you simply run the election over again.
To add to this argument: Need it be reiterated that children have been found to be biologically wired for learning things? They're simply wired to learn them in an experiential way rather than a classroom setting.
Furthermore, any parent who understands fractions is qualified to teach them. There is no sacred magic to teaching or learning, the idea that there is comes from the fact that people tend to define "teaching" as "herding enslaved children into a room and presenting information to them in a boring manner".
The old elementary school saying was right, learning is fun. What goes on in government schools, however, isn't learning.
Scientists should get on with their experiments and leave metaphysics alone.
There is no good reason for scientists to be taking their work as an excuse to tell us whether or not we have free will or souls, how to govern societies, where the universe Came From (in a strictly metaphysical sense), or how to raise our children. When they do so they make science into a religion, and this religion has an unfortunate history of becoming the state religion ("Let's kill the Jews because they believe humans are metaphysically better than mere animals!" was Hitlers main reason for wanting them dead).
Slashdot Mirror
In Orwell's future you could support the Party. With this law, if I go onto a Democratic Party message board and post that Bush is the greatest thing Evar I can get 2 years in jail. I can get 2 years in jail for liking the government! WTF?!
Better and more efficient than template metaprogramming: Lisp programming with declare statements indicating the places where type guarantees can be made.
Be happy. When Object Pascal (a language a little itty bit cleaner than C++, but mostly just nicer looking) programmers mention what we code in we're laughed out of the room, because everyone still thinks "Pascal" means the language invented by Wirth in the early '70s.
You, you use C++, which may be on somewhat of a decline thanks to its children Java and C#, but is still considered a "real language".
You're forgetting one:
Common Lisp - Fast nowadays, powerful, flexible, but everyone ignores it.
I see a problem with your model: The skill of programmers is distributed by the motivation, practice and experience they put into their craft, not by a random statistically normal function. If people try hard enough they tend to achieve the level of skill that can be called guru.
I'm really hoping that these "papers" end up being serious material about new technologies which run on Linux, rather than another 100 papers on "Why Linux Should Do as I Say to Achieve World Domination".
Your statement should say "Never give money to a political nonprofit of any size."
That would have been too obvious. Instead, they created the public school system, the "experts" that are always on CNN telling us how to live, and other general means of convincing people to take their freedom and use it for exactly what they are told to do.
Read this.
Problem is that the idiots get laid and we don't. It's the opposite of how it should be.
Ditto to "The Fifth Element". That thing was a travesty of science fiction.
Wrong. Evolutionary biology is the only theory making any progress towards understanding nature that: 1.Predicts immutable and universal behaviors and laws, 2.Does so with the assumption that all phenonmena are either probabalistic or deterministic.
However, those two ideas tend not to be proven wrong.
They graduated with flying colors, because they love authoritarianism. This is why they go on to perpetuate more of it.
I argue the same because in a world where every person has a different moral system the only way to ensure that the correct morals are ever followed by anyone is to give people the right to decide their own morality. From that the entire rights system flows.
A corporation shall act in the way its charter prescribes, for that is its genetic code. Change the charter, and perhaps you shall get a better corporation.
Wait a minute, IRQs are part of the processor! SuSE doesn't have an IRQ implementation!
Wow, the bullshit stinks even worse than I thought it would.
Sufficiently meta'd metahumor is indistinguishable from a crappy excuse not to have real jokes.
IMDB is practically a wiki, that page is fake.
Bubble->Burst();
As long as it doesn't turn into a partisan political mouthpiece like "Family Guy" has. If I want to see one-sided political humor, I'll read "Doonesbury."
You seem to have misspelled "American Dad" and "The Boondocks".
So you prefer paper ballots that are filled out, copied so the voter can verify later, and then dropped into a little box?
So what if the voting machine changes my vote to be for George W. Bush and then prints out that tampered version on paper, when in fact I voted for Dennis Kucinich?
If I may correct myself, using public key cryptography would allow vote tampering in this case. A single, private key should be used.
What would really be nice for secure voting would be a system of encrypted voting. Everyone writes their vote to a small disk or USB dongle twice: once cleartext, once encrypted with a public key. On Election Day the dongle is plugged into the open-source voting machine, which increments the vote-count of the appropriate candidate based on the cleartext version and associates the encrypted vote in a database with the voter's identity.
If at any point the vote needs to be verified or the voter contests the way their vote was registered said voter simply decrypts their encrypted vote with the necessary private key. Doing so violates the principle of the secret ballot, but unfortunately that's what must be done in order to verify that a vote was registered correctly, unless you simply run the election over again.
To add to this argument: Need it be reiterated that children have been found to be biologically wired for learning things? They're simply wired to learn them in an experiential way rather than a classroom setting.
Furthermore, any parent who understands fractions is qualified to teach them. There is no sacred magic to teaching or learning, the idea that there is comes from the fact that people tend to define "teaching" as "herding enslaved children into a room and presenting information to them in a boring manner".
The old elementary school saying was right, learning is fun. What goes on in government schools, however, isn't learning.
The devil doesn't exist, we do.
Scientists should get on with their experiments and leave metaphysics alone.
There is no good reason for scientists to be taking their work as an excuse to tell us whether or not we have free will or souls, how to govern societies, where the universe Came From (in a strictly metaphysical sense), or how to raise our children. When they do so they make science into a religion, and this religion has an unfortunate history of becoming the state religion ("Let's kill the Jews because they believe humans are metaphysically better than mere animals!" was Hitlers main reason for wanting them dead).