Then Google should do things the right way, the first time, and then nobody would stand up to criticize them.
In this case, all Google has to do is say that information about who read what book will -not- be stored, and this 'concern' goes away. It's a legit concern, and easily rectified.
There's no such thing as a 'bad test' that has a high rate of accuracy, there are only people who are using the test wrong.
With 86% accuracy, you can't rely on this test... But if it comes up positive, then you know you had better check them with a better, more expensive, less fallible test.
If this test were cheap enough to use it on every patient that came in for anything, it would be a -huge- boon to society. If it cost 10x what a checkup costs, it'd be utterly useless.
If your language supports it, you can break multiple loops at once.
In your example above, though, a 'break' instead of your 'goto nexti' would do exactly the same thing. The foo(i) would not get executed in either case, and the outer for(i) loop would continue at the next value.
I think you mean to place the foo(i) and nexti: after the last brace, though.
I would rather just use a boolean flag, and name it properly. It would be easier to read.
Prejudice to a race, with reason or without, good or bad, is racism. That's the definition.
And since people want to eliminate racism because it hurts people, and he's hurt, it doesn't matter that she was justified in assuming whitey can't speak Japanese. It's still hurtful. (Yes, I'm 'whitey', too, and I'm studying Japanese.)
And what good does it do to 'speak up consistently' when every random stranger does the same thing? One man cannot educate a whole country. At best he would be seen as very rude, and reinforce the 'rude ignorant foreigner' stereotype.
Okay, I admit I do it. I have a $20 keyboard and $15 mouse that I brought in. But if something happened and I never saw them again, 'oh well'. They don't store any data, and they have no value other than their replacement value.
A laptop? Are you insane!?
Take the $1250, the company now owns the laptop. Do your personal stuff on a computer you actually own.
You laugh, but that's the basis of 'Test Driven Design'.:D You were only supplied with 1 test, and you passed it. Had their been more tests, your code would have had to be what was really wanted.
I've started to think about how a class could be run like that... Create a series of unit test sets that progressively test more of the program. For each assignment, give the students the next set of tests and have them code to make the tests pass. In the next class session, work to show everyone how to make it happen, then give the next set.
I have not used a 'goto' statement in about 15 years now. But it's not some irrational fear. It was all due to someone saying 'there's no situation that requires a goto' and 'goto statements make code hard to read'.
And after I used goto a little more, I realized they were correct. In any good, modern language, 'goto' is completely unnecessary and makes your code harder to read.
If you're breaking out of a loop, you should use 'break'. If you're continuing a loop, 'continue'. If you're handling an error, throw an exception. If you're calling another piece of code, make that code a function and call it properly.
Can't speak for Poland, but for the US... yes, it's realistic. I work for a company that does it's business over the internet and we've hired just about every 'race' you can imagine, and not because it's mandated. They were legitimately the right persons for the job. (Thank God we don't do any of the 'affirmative action' bullshit. It's just as racist as being racist is.)
A picture like the one from MS (but with younger people) would be spot-on in a meeting from any department in the company, including accounting, customer service, and tech.
As for Mission Impossible... An American in Russia would be pretty freaking obvious no matter what color his skin was. The facial features are just too different and noticeable.
"Hint: creating information is a service people will gladly pay for..."
No, obviously, it's not. Creating -certain- information might be, but piracy is proving that at least some people are not willing to pay. They will just take. Misguided as it might be, everything the RIAA is doing is an attempt to get paid for information. (Well, RIAA wants to get paid for protecting that info, and pay the creator for creating it.)
If I like something as much as the pricetag, I pay for it. It's that simple. Unfortunately, there are a lot of poorly priced pieces of information out there. There's an anime series that I want that is around $800 for 52 episodes. $15 per episode. It's simply not worth that. And it's not even subbed or dubbed in English. And then I'd have to pay to import it as well.
There are other things that I could get for free that I've paid for, though. Jonathan Coulton has some amazing songs, but I'll be honest... Most of the best ones are free to download right from his site. I paid for them anyhow because I enjoy them so much, and the price was right.
We've entered a new age and the market simply doesn't work like it used to. Information-related industries, including games and music, are simply going to have to keep up with the times.
Okay, there was only one phone with the Android OS until very recently. It's going up against the iPhone which has been out 3 or 4 years, the Blackberry which has been out 5-10 years, and many other 'smart phones' that are established with Windows Mobile.
3% is huge. Any random phone would love to have 3% in a market that included Apple and Blackberry as the main players.
Also, an imitator is constantly limiting himself to the style of the original. The original is constantly striving to break his own limitations. An imitator could never produce a book as good as the original.
"If you paid attention, they showed Ford using a towel in many of the appropriate ways, they just didn't call attention to it"
I apparently need to rewatch the movie as there are depths to it that I missed the first time.
And because I feel the need to chime in:
I was disappointed in many of the changes, especially Zaphod's head, and the fact that Adams okay'd those changes helps a bit... But I'd still rather they stuck to the book a bit better.
Not that the movie wasn't good... It just wasn't as good as it could have been.
Actually, the summary says the opposite... That certain people turned to gaming as a 'coping mechanism' to relieve their depression.
The last bit at the end is confusing because it says 'on the flip side', but it's actually the same side. The coping mechanism is good for your mental health. Well duh! It wouldn't be a very good coping mechanism if it made you MORE depressed!
No it's not. Most people didn't agree with the first saying to begin with. There was just 1 really charismatic person that said it, and a few who kept it alive.
Guess what? There are still people who believe that.
It was never the country's motto, whatever you might think.
Sounds to me like a bunch of lawsuits just waiting to happen. Last I checked, the law doesn't give any rights to anyone to take a work that isn't theirs. If Google takes a work, and the author misses the deadline, what's stopping that author from suing?
Absolutely nothing, as far as I can tell. Some crazy agreement with a guild that probably has nothing to do with the author in the first place? Yeah, right. That'll hold up in court the same way as if I sold my neighbor's car while he was on vacation. 'I've got a contract!' doesn't mean anything if what you're doing is illegal.
The problem is, there are -other- people willing to pay for it. All the people complaining about the state of DLC are the ones that aren't happy with it. The happy ones continue to funnel money into it.
So in the end, the problem is really that the complainers have absolutely no control over the happy people. And they hate that.
The biggest complaint I hear is about DLC that's already available on launch day. They think that content should have been part of the original package and that they are being screwed. They completely forget that -nothing- is free. They paid for what's on the disc and that's it, buy they are demanding more. If cost was -really- that important to them, they wouldn't buy on launch day. They'd wait until it's half price or less, and then play it.
But they think they can get their way by whining, so they do.
That chart shows the percentage of total questions, NOT the number of questions asked.
In other words, it could be that Ruby and Python developers tend to have odd work-weeks that aren't the standard Mon-Fri boring crap. So maybe on the weekend, C++ and Java workers stop asking questions, but Ruby and Python don't.
I hate it when people misuse statistics to 'prove' something and don't even know what their own numbers mean.
But he -did- have permission. They have given permission by having limewire share their computer's contents.
If I put a sign in my front yard next to my lawn chairs that says 'Free chairs', even if I can't read the sign myself, I can't blame anyone for taking the chairs. I did give them permission, even if I didn't know I was doing it.
And as far as 'protected computer'... Leaving filesharing open to the world is the opposite of 'protected'. Having a bulldog in your front yard and leaving your front door open does not mean your house is protected.
We've been trained all our lives that the Government will step in and save us. Is it any wonder that people no longer bother to research things before they put their money in them?
I research dang near everything I buy, right down to my toaster-oven. Because I do so much research, I know how to read the information out there, and it has been a -long- time since I bought something that was crap. (Except some toys I bought on impulse without researching!) Most people can't be bothered, so they pay the price eventually.
But between getting away with being lazy and thinking the government will protect them, what motive do they really have to make wise decisions in the first place?
Slashdot Mirror
Then Google should do things the right way, the first time, and then nobody would stand up to criticize them.
In this case, all Google has to do is say that information about who read what book will -not- be stored, and this 'concern' goes away. It's a legit concern, and easily rectified.
There's no such thing as a 'bad test' that has a high rate of accuracy, there are only people who are using the test wrong.
With 86% accuracy, you can't rely on this test... But if it comes up positive, then you know you had better check them with a better, more expensive, less fallible test.
If this test were cheap enough to use it on every patient that came in for anything, it would be a -huge- boon to society. If it cost 10x what a checkup costs, it'd be utterly useless.
No, he's 'Bank, Rob A'... That's ebonics.
And let's not forget that with 'smart processes and proper incentives', it's even cheaper yet to outsource.
If your language supports it, you can break multiple loops at once.
In your example above, though, a 'break' instead of your 'goto nexti' would do exactly the same thing. The foo(i) would not get executed in either case, and the outer for(i) loop would continue at the next value.
I think you mean to place the foo(i) and nexti: after the last brace, though.
I would rather just use a boolean flag, and name it properly. It would be easier to read.
Prejudice to a race, with reason or without, good or bad, is racism. That's the definition.
And since people want to eliminate racism because it hurts people, and he's hurt, it doesn't matter that she was justified in assuming whitey can't speak Japanese. It's still hurtful. (Yes, I'm 'whitey', too, and I'm studying Japanese.)
And what good does it do to 'speak up consistently' when every random stranger does the same thing? One man cannot educate a whole country. At best he would be seen as very rude, and reinforce the 'rude ignorant foreigner' stereotype.
Do -not- use personal equipment for company use.
Okay, I admit I do it. I have a $20 keyboard and $15 mouse that I brought in. But if something happened and I never saw them again, 'oh well'. They don't store any data, and they have no value other than their replacement value.
A laptop? Are you insane!?
Take the $1250, the company now owns the laptop. Do your personal stuff on a computer you actually own.
KEEP THEM SEPARATE.
You laugh, but that's the basis of 'Test Driven Design'. :D You were only supplied with 1 test, and you passed it. Had their been more tests, your code would have had to be what was really wanted.
I've started to think about how a class could be run like that... Create a series of unit test sets that progressively test more of the program. For each assignment, give the students the next set of tests and have them code to make the tests pass. In the next class session, work to show everyone how to make it happen, then give the next set.
I have not used a 'goto' statement in about 15 years now. But it's not some irrational fear. It was all due to someone saying 'there's no situation that requires a goto' and 'goto statements make code hard to read'.
And after I used goto a little more, I realized they were correct. In any good, modern language, 'goto' is completely unnecessary and makes your code harder to read.
If you're breaking out of a loop, you should use 'break'. If you're continuing a loop, 'continue'. If you're handling an error, throw an exception. If you're calling another piece of code, make that code a function and call it properly.
Can't speak for Poland, but for the US... yes, it's realistic. I work for a company that does it's business over the internet and we've hired just about every 'race' you can imagine, and not because it's mandated. They were legitimately the right persons for the job. (Thank God we don't do any of the 'affirmative action' bullshit. It's just as racist as being racist is.)
A picture like the one from MS (but with younger people) would be spot-on in a meeting from any department in the company, including accounting, customer service, and tech.
As for Mission Impossible... An American in Russia would be pretty freaking obvious no matter what color his skin was. The facial features are just too different and noticeable.
More importantly ,what about anyone convicted under that act while it wasn't really an act? Do they get their time, money, etc back?
"Hint: creating information is a service people will gladly pay for..."
No, obviously, it's not. Creating -certain- information might be, but piracy is proving that at least some people are not willing to pay. They will just take. Misguided as it might be, everything the RIAA is doing is an attempt to get paid for information. (Well, RIAA wants to get paid for protecting that info, and pay the creator for creating it.)
If I like something as much as the pricetag, I pay for it. It's that simple. Unfortunately, there are a lot of poorly priced pieces of information out there. There's an anime series that I want that is around $800 for 52 episodes. $15 per episode. It's simply not worth that. And it's not even subbed or dubbed in English. And then I'd have to pay to import it as well.
There are other things that I could get for free that I've paid for, though. Jonathan Coulton has some amazing songs, but I'll be honest... Most of the best ones are free to download right from his site. I paid for them anyhow because I enjoy them so much, and the price was right.
We've entered a new age and the market simply doesn't work like it used to. Information-related industries, including games and music, are simply going to have to keep up with the times.
Okay, there was only one phone with the Android OS until very recently. It's going up against the iPhone which has been out 3 or 4 years, the Blackberry which has been out 5-10 years, and many other 'smart phones' that are established with Windows Mobile.
3% is huge. Any random phone would love to have 3% in a market that included Apple and Blackberry as the main players.
Also, an imitator is constantly limiting himself to the style of the original. The original is constantly striving to break his own limitations. An imitator could never produce a book as good as the original.
"If you paid attention, they showed Ford using a towel in many of the appropriate ways, they just didn't call attention to it"
I apparently need to rewatch the movie as there are depths to it that I missed the first time.
And because I feel the need to chime in:
I was disappointed in many of the changes, especially Zaphod's head, and the fact that Adams okay'd those changes helps a bit... But I'd still rather they stuck to the book a bit better.
Not that the movie wasn't good... It just wasn't as good as it could have been.
Actually, the summary says the opposite... That certain people turned to gaming as a 'coping mechanism' to relieve their depression.
The last bit at the end is confusing because it says 'on the flip side', but it's actually the same side. The coping mechanism is good for your mental health. Well duh! It wouldn't be a very good coping mechanism if it made you MORE depressed!
No it's not. Most people didn't agree with the first saying to begin with. There was just 1 really charismatic person that said it, and a few who kept it alive.
Guess what? There are still people who believe that.
It was never the country's motto, whatever you might think.
Newsflash: Dying Service Fails To Sell Itself, Gives Itself Away.
-yawn-
Sounds to me like a bunch of lawsuits just waiting to happen. Last I checked, the law doesn't give any rights to anyone to take a work that isn't theirs. If Google takes a work, and the author misses the deadline, what's stopping that author from suing?
Absolutely nothing, as far as I can tell. Some crazy agreement with a guild that probably has nothing to do with the author in the first place? Yeah, right. That'll hold up in court the same way as if I sold my neighbor's car while he was on vacation. 'I've got a contract!' doesn't mean anything if what you're doing is illegal.
Wish I had modpoints. That's brilliant.
Yeah, it really is that simple.
The problem is, there are -other- people willing to pay for it. All the people complaining about the state of DLC are the ones that aren't happy with it. The happy ones continue to funnel money into it.
So in the end, the problem is really that the complainers have absolutely no control over the happy people. And they hate that.
The biggest complaint I hear is about DLC that's already available on launch day. They think that content should have been part of the original package and that they are being screwed. They completely forget that -nothing- is free. They paid for what's on the disc and that's it, buy they are demanding more. If cost was -really- that important to them, they wouldn't buy on launch day. They'd wait until it's half price or less, and then play it.
But they think they can get their way by whining, so they do.
That chart shows the percentage of total questions, NOT the number of questions asked.
In other words, it could be that Ruby and Python developers tend to have odd work-weeks that aren't the standard Mon-Fri boring crap. So maybe on the weekend, C++ and Java workers stop asking questions, but Ruby and Python don't.
I hate it when people misuse statistics to 'prove' something and don't even know what their own numbers mean.
Cripes, with some of the crazy emails around here, I -have- to read the entire email to be absolutely sure it wasn't for me.
But he -did- have permission. They have given permission by having limewire share their computer's contents.
If I put a sign in my front yard next to my lawn chairs that says 'Free chairs', even if I can't read the sign myself, I can't blame anyone for taking the chairs. I did give them permission, even if I didn't know I was doing it.
And as far as 'protected computer' ... Leaving filesharing open to the world is the opposite of 'protected'. Having a bulldog in your front yard and leaving your front door open does not mean your house is protected.
We've been trained all our lives that the Government will step in and save us. Is it any wonder that people no longer bother to research things before they put their money in them?
I research dang near everything I buy, right down to my toaster-oven. Because I do so much research, I know how to read the information out there, and it has been a -long- time since I bought something that was crap. (Except some toys I bought on impulse without researching!) Most people can't be bothered, so they pay the price eventually.
But between getting away with being lazy and thinking the government will protect them, what motive do they really have to make wise decisions in the first place?