Theo audited a whole operating system for security. Zed wrote a basic single process web server. You know, code like:
ARGV $stdin.gets.chomp
while ( line = gets )
if line =~/^GET/
method, request, http_version = line.split(" ")
url, qs == request.split("?")
elsif line =~/^POST/i
while (post_data = gets)...
Python is Ruby without rails and real objects or continuations with silly spacing. 99% of Python weenies these days are people who think their too cool for Ruby but can't compete in a PHP marketplace. That's not to say Python isn't cool. It is, but there's an even bigger trend of "me too"-ers who don't know what they're doing moving to python because they want to be "different" from rubyers
"Rails is the new PHP" and people have been quietly removing it from their resumes for fear of being branded as beginners. But this guy can be dismissed out of hand by just reading the title of his blog.
Ok, what's the flaw in creationism?
We all know Evolution's flaws, but instead of tossing out the conclusion we're supposed to wait with bated breath for stopgap theories to plug the holes that keep getting bigger. Not believing in evolution doesn't mean believing in creationism.
Keppler proved Copernicus wrong, but Heliocentrism still prevailed. You won't be able to learn anything if you refuse to admit Darwin might be wrong too.
So if education isn't getting you what you want, try something else--like maybe work, or honesty, or kindness, or humility, or learning.
By "education" what you realy mean is either birth into privilege and a certificate from a institution of the privileged to prove it, or government funded institutions that declare everyone "educated" by fiat, when all they've really done is learn to parrot some nonsense and drink beer.
While John Edwards may espouse "socialist" positions, he has never been a member of, candidate for, or leader in the "Socialist" party, except as far as you believe CPUSA is affiliated with the Democrats.
"Education" means telling people what to believe. So what you mean is if everyone just agreed with you, they'd be a lot more educated. I'm not saying education is a bad thing, if people are educated correctly -- by which I mean that they will be taught to agree with me. But it's not education. It's stupidity or apathy. Heavy emphasis on the latter, which probably is causative of the former. I don't know if I was gifted (in first grade they said I was) but I grew up in a poor neighborhood, and I think I'm smart enough (I agree with myself most of the time) to have acquired (not received) a pretty good education, meaning depth of knowledge. Whether I drew the right conclusions or not...you can draw your own conclusions.
The "strong local government" advocated by those who actually *opposed* the Constitution was a cry from two factions, which were closely allied. Nepotists who, like Gov. George Clinton of New York, and many of the entrenched Virginian Burgesses opposed the constitution on the grounds that it would weaken their local fiefdoms; and slavers, who feared that a moral majority would put a stop to their filthy practice. It was to combat the anti-constitution propaganda put out by these groups that the Federalist papers were written. After the constitution was ratified, immature romantics like Thomas Jefferson were swayed by fantasies, and would have seen the French Revolution re-enacted here to uphold their "ideals" of limited government which really only meant "limited government when I'm not in power." Later, the local-rights versus federal-rights argument reemerged in the mouths of pro-slavery southern secessionists who did not want the Federal government (the majority) telling them what was right and wrong. The principal planks in the Libertarian party are a stance against drug regulation and an evangelical atheism. Atheism's primary appeal isn't an explanation of how dinosaur bones came about or why monkeys have thumbs and puppies look like they are laughing, but as a support system for those who believe that someone else, whether you call it "God" or "Religion" should be allowed to tell them what they want to do is wrong. It's a childish notion that most people outgrow, commonly seen in teenage know-it-alls, but until recently most people were quickly dispelled of this belief when they encountered the "real world" -- which has become increasingly distant in our prosperous and generous society. Libertarians see "Government", possibly rightly so, as that authority figure telling them what they can and cannot do, and rather than reason about what they're doing (probably because their conscience makes them uncomfortable), they lash out at the authority of a democratic government -- the moral majority as "oppressive."
Having a king who doesn't especially want to be king is almost always the better option. Ramses was a great administrator, but he was certainly more fixated on building those damn pyramids as paeans to his own glory than he was on defense. Pick your monument, whether it's "Universal Pre-K", "Mare Latinum", "Manifest Destiny", or "SDI."
Or you can believe that most of the time most of the people do what's right. And then use a system, such as democracy or free markets to try to harness that idea, such that while any given individual may be smarter than the consensus at any given time, overall, the consensus does a better job. Because the real problem is, that finding that specific individual who is right (remember, it's not necessarily always the same person) and then convincing everyone to do what that person says, is rather tricky.
No, categorizing languages by how they are executed (whether they are compiled or scripted) is like categorizing vehicles by how they run. You can place a boat on a trailer and roll it down the highway, but that doesn't make it have wheels.
In Perl, $i += 5 doesn't ever, in fact get compiled to assembly. That is the distinguishment. The Perl interpreter handles the expression, it being a program that is currently being executed as machine instructions, and the code it processes is merely parameters. Virtual Machines, such a Java, obscure this a little, since there is a compilation to an intermediary language, but the fact is that the Java virtual machine operates on a series of instructions that are, in part, patterned on machine instructions, and that Perl is pre-processed into a symbol structure before being passed to the interpreter confuse the fact that the difference between programming and scripting is that in the one you are programming the machine, and in the other you a writing a script for a pre-written program to execute.
I know, let's poke everyone's eyes out and saw off their left leg so we're all the same and the world's fair. While we're at it we could appoint a supreme dictator to equally distribute all wealth and have him appoint a committee of cronies to manage the economy. And maybe kill all the Jews and Jehovah's Witnesses to boot
Because the feds have the power to regulate the spectrum when it's near the state border, and when it's near the range of that area, and guess what, your utopia in central Texas is next to that. You could potentially interfere with the station that could potentially interfere with the station across the state line. The little black lines on the map don't jam radio frequencies. In fact, you can hardly even see them in real life when you stand right next to the state border.
Slashdot Mirror
Theo audited a whole operating system for security. Zed wrote a basic single process web server. You know, code like: ARGV $stdin.gets.chomp while ( line = gets ) if line =~ /^GET/
method, request, http_version = line.split(" ")
url, qs == request.split("?")
elsif line =~ /^POST/i
while (post_data = gets) ...
Python is Ruby without rails and real objects or continuations with silly spacing. 99% of Python weenies these days are people who think their too cool for Ruby but can't compete in a PHP marketplace. That's not to say Python isn't cool. It is, but there's an even bigger trend of "me too"-ers who don't know what they're doing moving to python because they want to be "different" from rubyers
"Rails is the new PHP" and people have been quietly removing it from their resumes for fear of being branded as beginners. But this guy can be dismissed out of hand by just reading the title of his blog.
That's what we need, a bunch of small nation states and more world wars!
Ok, what's the flaw in creationism? We all know Evolution's flaws, but instead of tossing out the conclusion we're supposed to wait with bated breath for stopgap theories to plug the holes that keep getting bigger. Not believing in evolution doesn't mean believing in creationism. Keppler proved Copernicus wrong, but Heliocentrism still prevailed. You won't be able to learn anything if you refuse to admit Darwin might be wrong too.
Why should the "haves" see less?
So if education isn't getting you what you want, try something else--like maybe work, or honesty, or kindness, or humility, or learning. By "education" what you realy mean is either birth into privilege and a certificate from a institution of the privileged to prove it, or government funded institutions that declare everyone "educated" by fiat, when all they've really done is learn to parrot some nonsense and drink beer.
Does Zope? Or Slashdot? Or Wikipedia? Or any web app?
While John Edwards may espouse "socialist" positions, he has never been a member of, candidate for, or leader in the "Socialist" party, except as far as you believe CPUSA is affiliated with the Democrats.
As additional proof, I present: Bill Clinton, NPR, Rosie O'Donnell, Whole Foods, Subaru outback.
"Education" means telling people what to believe. So what you mean is if everyone just agreed with you, they'd be a lot more educated. I'm not saying education is a bad thing, if people are educated correctly -- by which I mean that they will be taught to agree with me. But it's not education. It's stupidity or apathy. Heavy emphasis on the latter, which probably is causative of the former. I don't know if I was gifted (in first grade they said I was) but I grew up in a poor neighborhood, and I think I'm smart enough (I agree with myself most of the time) to have acquired (not received) a pretty good education, meaning depth of knowledge. Whether I drew the right conclusions or not...you can draw your own conclusions.
The "strong local government" advocated by those who actually *opposed* the Constitution was a cry from two factions, which were closely allied. Nepotists who, like Gov. George Clinton of New York, and many of the entrenched Virginian Burgesses opposed the constitution on the grounds that it would weaken their local fiefdoms; and slavers, who feared that a moral majority would put a stop to their filthy practice. It was to combat the anti-constitution propaganda put out by these groups that the Federalist papers were written. After the constitution was ratified, immature romantics like Thomas Jefferson were swayed by fantasies, and would have seen the French Revolution re-enacted here to uphold their "ideals" of limited government which really only meant "limited government when I'm not in power." Later, the local-rights versus federal-rights argument reemerged in the mouths of pro-slavery southern secessionists who did not want the Federal government (the majority) telling them what was right and wrong. The principal planks in the Libertarian party are a stance against drug regulation and an evangelical atheism. Atheism's primary appeal isn't an explanation of how dinosaur bones came about or why monkeys have thumbs and puppies look like they are laughing, but as a support system for those who believe that someone else, whether you call it "God" or "Religion" should be allowed to tell them what they want to do is wrong. It's a childish notion that most people outgrow, commonly seen in teenage know-it-alls, but until recently most people were quickly dispelled of this belief when they encountered the "real world" -- which has become increasingly distant in our prosperous and generous society. Libertarians see "Government", possibly rightly so, as that authority figure telling them what they can and cannot do, and rather than reason about what they're doing (probably because their conscience makes them uncomfortable), they lash out at the authority of a democratic government -- the moral majority as "oppressive."
Having a king who doesn't especially want to be king is almost always the better option. Ramses was a great administrator, but he was certainly more fixated on building those damn pyramids as paeans to his own glory than he was on defense. Pick your monument, whether it's "Universal Pre-K", "Mare Latinum", "Manifest Destiny", or "SDI."
Or you can believe that most of the time most of the people do what's right. And then use a system, such as democracy or free markets to try to harness that idea, such that while any given individual may be smarter than the consensus at any given time, overall, the consensus does a better job. Because the real problem is, that finding that specific individual who is right (remember, it's not necessarily always the same person) and then convincing everyone to do what that person says, is rather tricky.
Are you proposing another world war, this one hosted by canada, to permit that underground railway system to be built?
What have you done? Bah! Back in my day knowitall DB weenies could link directly to Codd, even if they'd never read him.
No, categorizing languages by how they are executed (whether they are compiled or scripted) is like categorizing vehicles by how they run. You can place a boat on a trailer and roll it down the highway, but that doesn't make it have wheels.
In Perl, $i += 5 doesn't ever, in fact get compiled to assembly. That is the distinguishment. The Perl interpreter handles the expression, it being a program that is currently being executed as machine instructions, and the code it processes is merely parameters. Virtual Machines, such a Java, obscure this a little, since there is a compilation to an intermediary language, but the fact is that the Java virtual machine operates on a series of instructions that are, in part, patterned on machine instructions, and that Perl is pre-processed into a symbol structure before being passed to the interpreter confuse the fact that the difference between programming and scripting is that in the one you are programming the machine, and in the other you a writing a script for a pre-written program to execute.
I know, let's poke everyone's eyes out and saw off their left leg so we're all the same and the world's fair. While we're at it we could appoint a supreme dictator to equally distribute all wealth and have him appoint a committee of cronies to manage the economy. And maybe kill all the Jews and Jehovah's Witnesses to boot
Because the feds have the power to regulate the spectrum when it's near the state border, and when it's near the range of that area, and guess what, your utopia in central Texas is next to that. You could potentially interfere with the station that could potentially interfere with the station across the state line. The little black lines on the map don't jam radio frequencies. In fact, you can hardly even see them in real life when you stand right next to the state border.
To who?
What was the final count he came up with for Sodom? for Gomorrah?
What services do they have rights to which their access is inadequate?
Your suggestion is that a smaller minority party that allies with a larger minority party in order to achieve a majory should be in control?
The Taliban. And/or Al Qaidi.