If it tasted the same (or could be made to), would it matter?
When was the last time you had cherry/orange/banana flavored anything that tasted real?
I imagine the "meat flavor" would be about the same. Engineered to please the masses, but not taste anything like the real thing. In fact, I imagine it would taste like something else to ease the stomachs of those that don't like meat because they would be the only ones really working toward that goal.
I can't believe you missed the obvious relationship to the shape of a CD and the shape of a UFO... It's much bigger than GWB. It's an alien invasion, but they are trying to make our government look like incompetent boobs so we will welcome our alien overlords as a better alternative to the system we have now.
I use AMD64 Debian Unstable and I wouldn't recommend it to someone that wants things to "just work."
ie: I came home one day to find a bunch of updates that moved ia32-libs into a different package manager and it had some convoluted instructions on setting it up (which of course I didn't read) and I soon found out that I couldn't run things like Dwarf Fortress that required one of the old dependencies that had not been carried over. Now, I really didn't care at the time cause I play the game in a semi-seasonal manner, but I tried it the other day and it's still not working. Did I bug it? No. I've been debating on going back to Lenny though to get away from the "playground" mentality of updates that sometimes just make changes to see what happens.
He must be one of them evangelists paid to surf social blogs and post wonderful things about X product and berate users and things that are not made by Y company.;)
I use FF3 at work and leave my machine up all week with FF running. I'm constantly refreshing, opening and closing tabs (being a developer for web(CF), Applications(C#), Flash(AS2/AS3), and javascript) I reboot it every Friday and I never notice FF using up what's left of my piddly 768MB of memory. (New computer is on budget...) I have Adblock Plus, Firebug, IETab and Greasemonkey installed.
But if I start a game after unlocking said content, I can no longer play unless logged in. And I did say you could probably play vanilla DA without verification. Not sure where you read I said otherwise. But EA most definitively has draconian DRM still. The armor and expansion was NOT a download. The serial key came in the box, but installing said key locks you out of any game. Period. That's my point.
The unlockable content is tied to an account online even if it's included in the box (I bought the collectors with the armor set and the golem mission serial numbers in the box) and both of those serial numbers require an online account to tie them to. Sure, if I would have bought the vanilla pack, I may be able to install it without online verification, but to state that draconian DRM doesn't exist at EA is sort of a false statement just like saying Stardock isn't DRM when it's required to unlock a game.
That's kind of why I eluded to "rulers", since in a voting community it will still be moderated by the majority and therefore the ones "in control." (ie: the majority belief)
There's a difference between adding something and having it reset. The setting apparently was set in IE, and if it's getting purposefully changed that's a problem. If Firefox was changing the setting you had it would be the same argument, but I don't think this is happening.
Right/wrong and good/evil are both constructs of the current ruler(s) of society. I mean, someone has to declare something wrong/evil for it to actually be wrong/evil, otherwise it's just different.
...or leverage their position to entice people wishing to be on the committee.
I mean look at it like this:
"Hi, I'm on the board of this source management software site and I also happen to work at Microsoft. If you promise to drop all development for ____ platform (or create Microsoft compliant hardware), I'll ensure you are voted into a chair of this advisory committee, then you can encourage the community to write applications that work with your systems and our systems! It's a win-win situation, you see?"
I wish my parent's border collie would lose interest after a few minutes... he'll bark and chase a laser pointer for hours and when you are done, he sits next to the piano and stares at you, then the pointer, for the next few hours.
I always thought Hyper Threading was... "For each processor core that is physically present, the operating system addresses two virtual processors" - Wikipedia. Not two actual processors.
You don't even need to do that... just make a motherboard with a plate behind it that share the same holes for mounting and have a gap for water. Seal it, fill with water, and you have the same thing. If you want to put in transfer "ports" for CPU cooling blocks you can. A motherboard manufacturer could do that now and include a CPU and chipset block with some standard nozzles for connecting GPU block hoses. Drop in a small pump and external heat sink and they could sell it to gamers and server builders today.
That's a problem unless he used system calls to obtain values. There is very little code that's entirely self contained... especially today. Even dealing with strings you are assuming that the compiler does things proper. It could possibly have been fixed by the compiler. We wouldn't know unless we had the code. All we have is a story. (One side at that...)
I understand your position though and I'm not defending him. Don't get me wrong. I'm just interjecting.
I know I'm going to regret saying this for some reason, but could this be an affect of "faith"?
I mean... We don't know how the world works. We kind of have a basic idea but there are holes to our understanding. If he somehow created code so complex that works, but he doesn't understand how it works there are two sides of the discussion that quickly falls into the right vs. wrong or good vs. bad debate. One may also argue the idea that invention and discovery is partly random or by chance. He could have come up with an algorithm that someone has been slaving over for years strictly by accident. You can debate this for hours, but the act is committed.
Arguably, he should analyze said code as a self initiative to answer all the questions. Not doing so lends me to believe he chose the career for the wrong reason, but it also gets the job done. This to me is just like people who go through life accepting a "creator" is taking care of things. Ignorance of detail doesn't mean it's wrong, it just means they think on a different scale.
I'm a bare bones detail person. I want to know how every little bolt works and it frustrates me to know end when I'm coding in an environment like.NET when something is handled by the underlying code and I don't see how. Yes, I can dig into the shared source and reflect the code to see it, but that's the extra step most programmers today don't do. Now, there is a limit to my madness. I accept that a String will be handled properly without verifying every little bit... but there's a fine line of complication and ease of development that I think we are teetering on.
Unit tests are only for consistency... the test could be totally wrong and supply irrelevant information, but it will work like the last copy. Congrats to backwards compatibility.
Slashdot Mirror
If it tasted the same (or could be made to), would it matter?
When was the last time you had cherry/orange/banana flavored anything that tasted real?
I imagine the "meat flavor" would be about the same. Engineered to please the masses, but not taste anything like the real thing. In fact, I imagine it would taste like something else to ease the stomachs of those that don't like meat because they would be the only ones really working toward that goal.
I can't believe you missed the obvious relationship to the shape of a CD and the shape of a UFO... It's much bigger than GWB. It's an alien invasion, but they are trying to make our government look like incompetent boobs so we will welcome our alien overlords as a better alternative to the system we have now.
I use AMD64 Debian Unstable and I wouldn't recommend it to someone that wants things to "just work."
ie: I came home one day to find a bunch of updates that moved ia32-libs into a different package manager and it had some convoluted instructions on setting it up (which of course I didn't read) and I soon found out that I couldn't run things like Dwarf Fortress that required one of the old dependencies that had not been carried over. Now, I really didn't care at the time cause I play the game in a semi-seasonal manner, but I tried it the other day and it's still not working. Did I bug it? No. I've been debating on going back to Lenny though to get away from the "playground" mentality of updates that sometimes just make changes to see what happens.
That would explain why it's more difficult than changing a tire to draw a circle in Gimp.
This is were I tell you that the GIMP browser plugin available for IE isn't as good as the Photoshop browser plugin I enjoy in Firefox...
He must be one of them evangelists paid to surf social blogs and post wonderful things about X product and berate users and things that are not made by Y company. ;)
I use FF3 at work and leave my machine up all week with FF running. I'm constantly refreshing, opening and closing tabs (being a developer for web(CF), Applications(C#), Flash(AS2/AS3), and javascript) I reboot it every Friday and I never notice FF using up what's left of my piddly 768MB of memory. (New computer is on budget...) I have Adblock Plus, Firebug, IETab and Greasemonkey installed.
goto:
goto goto
?
But if I start a game after unlocking said content, I can no longer play unless logged in. And I did say you could probably play vanilla DA without verification. Not sure where you read I said otherwise. But EA most definitively has draconian DRM still. The armor and expansion was NOT a download. The serial key came in the box, but installing said key locks you out of any game. Period. That's my point.
The unlockable content is tied to an account online even if it's included in the box (I bought the collectors with the armor set and the golem mission serial numbers in the box) and both of those serial numbers require an online account to tie them to. Sure, if I would have bought the vanilla pack, I may be able to install it without online verification, but to state that draconian DRM doesn't exist at EA is sort of a false statement just like saying Stardock isn't DRM when it's required to unlock a game.
That's kind of why I eluded to "rulers", since in a voting community it will still be moderated by the majority and therefore the ones "in control." (ie: the majority belief)
Or just sign into iGoogle and theme it.
There's a difference between adding something and having it reset. The setting apparently was set in IE, and if it's getting purposefully changed that's a problem. If Firefox was changing the setting you had it would be the same argument, but I don't think this is happening.
Right/wrong and good/evil are both constructs of the current ruler(s) of society. I mean, someone has to declare something wrong/evil for it to actually be wrong/evil, otherwise it's just different.
Sorry, I have strong feelings on that subject.
Um... Dragon Age... EA/Bioware ... I can't play my game unless I log into my EA account to verify that my unlocked content is legal.
That's better?
Windows 7 Starter forcing users wanting a real computing experience to upgrade... limitations like not being able to change your background, sounds, or colors and not even having a media center for playing your own media... really? That's not my idea. I wonder how much extra code they had to put in to disable features inherent to the actual OS.
I just got back from the tattoo parlor. I even scanned it into my Droid using the bar code scanning app to make sure it worked!
The only problem is that it keeps changing every holiday.
...or leverage their position to entice people wishing to be on the committee.
I mean look at it like this:
"Hi, I'm on the board of this source management software site and I also happen to work at Microsoft. If you promise to drop all development for ____ platform (or create Microsoft compliant hardware), I'll ensure you are voted into a chair of this advisory committee, then you can encourage the community to write applications that work with your systems and our systems! It's a win-win situation, you see?"
I wish my parent's border collie would lose interest after a few minutes... he'll bark and chase a laser pointer for hours and when you are done, he sits next to the piano and stares at you, then the pointer, for the next few hours.
It's also easier to make it purr. You just don't clean the fans.
I always thought Hyper Threading was ...
"For each processor core that is physically present, the operating system addresses two virtual processors" - Wikipedia. Not two actual processors.
I was trying to figure out who they were talking about when they said "your computer." ;)
The review looks like it was written for a grade school presentation with that and the processor comment.
You don't even need to do that... just make a motherboard with a plate behind it that share the same holes for mounting and have a gap for water. Seal it, fill with water, and you have the same thing. If you want to put in transfer "ports" for CPU cooling blocks you can. A motherboard manufacturer could do that now and include a CPU and chipset block with some standard nozzles for connecting GPU block hoses. Drop in a small pump and external heat sink and they could sell it to gamers and server builders today.
That's a problem unless he used system calls to obtain values. There is very little code that's entirely self contained... especially today. Even dealing with strings you are assuming that the compiler does things proper. It could possibly have been fixed by the compiler. We wouldn't know unless we had the code. All we have is a story. (One side at that...)
I understand your position though and I'm not defending him. Don't get me wrong. I'm just interjecting.
I know I'm going to regret saying this for some reason, but could this be an affect of "faith"?
I mean... We don't know how the world works. We kind of have a basic idea but there are holes to our understanding. If he somehow created code so complex that works, but he doesn't understand how it works there are two sides of the discussion that quickly falls into the right vs. wrong or good vs. bad debate. One may also argue the idea that invention and discovery is partly random or by chance. He could have come up with an algorithm that someone has been slaving over for years strictly by accident. You can debate this for hours, but the act is committed.
Arguably, he should analyze said code as a self initiative to answer all the questions. Not doing so lends me to believe he chose the career for the wrong reason, but it also gets the job done. This to me is just like people who go through life accepting a "creator" is taking care of things. Ignorance of detail doesn't mean it's wrong, it just means they think on a different scale.
I'm a bare bones detail person. I want to know how every little bolt works and it frustrates me to know end when I'm coding in an environment like .NET when something is handled by the underlying code and I don't see how. Yes, I can dig into the shared source and reflect the code to see it, but that's the extra step most programmers today don't do. Now, there is a limit to my madness. I accept that a String will be handled properly without verifying every little bit... but there's a fine line of complication and ease of development that I think we are teetering on.
Unit tests are only for consistency... the test could be totally wrong and supply irrelevant information, but it will work like the last copy. Congrats to backwards compatibility.