Information wants to be free. Entertainment wants to be paid. People who write books to educate people want to be paid too, as do software developers who write utility software. Your medical information and what goes on inside the privacy of your home is also information. So are your personal computer files and surfing habits.
"information wants to be free" -- annoyingly simplistic slogan. Some people want the information to be free, some do not. The information itself doesn't want anything, unless you want to get all philosophical.
it becomes clear that solutions like Microsoft's and Google's are necessary and the potential benefit outweighs the privacy risk There's no reason why HIPAA shouldn't apply to any such solution.
trust me: no one cares Potential employers certainly care. Financial background checks are now becoming common. You really don't want your health information sold on an open market, trust me.
Everything is information Yes, just proving the point I already made. It's an empty excuse to expand into everything, as opposed to just searching the Internet. I used them since the early days, and they clearly stated they would stay focused on search, not trying to become a provider for everything on the Internet.
I, for one, do not welcome my new Google overlord.
They just expanded what they meant by search. They didn't start out with the idea that they would host all the information. They crossed the line when they turned private email into something to be mined for profit. I don't see what being a competitor to eBay/PayPal has to do with search. Spending over a billion dollars on YouTube is not core to search.
Of course, if Google became the Internet itself, it would be easier for them to "organize the world's information", and that's where their argument ultimately leads. It's just empire building and making up bullshit excuses after the fact.
Ask Google the same question. They started out saying they were just going to do search. Now it's all about empire building -- wanting to host all the information themselves (hey great, they want all my email, search data, and now health information too), hiring like mad top talent without any particular direction in mind, buying companies at crazy prices left and right. Competing against companies like eBay/PayPal. The list goes on and on. Google is the new Microsoft.
Apparently, you've never text messaged in Japanese. Unlike English, it hasn't been implemented horrendously and is rather painless in comparison. Could you explain how it works? I don't see how Japanese characters can be made easy to enter on a cell phone, let alone the limited character set of English.
Getting a job through somebody you know from a previous job happens all the time. Maybe it didn't work for you, but it's quite common. I have seen it over and over again and experienced it personally.
Off-topic? It's the topic of what is a "cult". Somebody gives a property that they think applies to cults, and comparisons to mainstream religions ensue -- completely on-topic. Catholic rituals are as bizarre as any cult's.
What's art? What's pornography? Is art that is sexually titillating pornography? It's a close call. The title of the album is "Virgin Killer". The girl is in a sexually suggestive pose. Sex sells, and so does controversy.
Could the picture be even more sexually explicit, just for "shock" value, and would you still call it art? At one point might you think "too far"? This album cover skirts the line, no doubt, and if you read the Wikipedia article you'll see there was controversy about this cover when it was released.
Realism REQUIRES FAITH. No, reality hits us over the head whether we want it to or not. Every day, every second of our lives, it confronts us. Science is just distilling the every day reasoning we do into clarity. Science rejects faith (acceptance without or in spite of reasoning) as a way of thinking that has time and again led to false beliefs that were later replaced with reason.
You can't do that - you cant be "kinda pregnant", "sorta a virgin" or "technically agnostic". Hate to tell you but you either are an Atheist or you are not. Not everything is binary. Words are often crude approximations of complex ideas, change over time, and are often inconsistently interpreted. All you're arguing for is what you interpret to be atheism, which must be a 100% certainty that there is no God (and boy is that word even more ill-defined). There are people who "believe" in "God" but have more doubt than others, just as there are varying degrees of belief for those who consider themselves atheist.
The problem is neither the term "atheist" nor "agnostic" accurately describes a position that I and a lot of people hold -- religion is mythology posing as truth, but the ultimate nature of reality is unknowable.
The point is if you value static type checking, no popular language has the features of C#. Java will probably get them in version 7 because of all the recent competition, which is a good thing (or maybe a new language like Scala will take over for Java).
So pointing to Python when you want to develop in a static language doesn't make for a good argument.
There's a big difference between making minor mistakes and foregoing all capitalization. I spend time on my posts and proofread them, but I'm not perfect, nor do I expect anybody else to be.
I have a limited amount of time to read stuff, and also a limited patience for writing that is distracting and hard to read. Form matters -- that's why the conventions exist.
Why do you use paragraphs? Why do you put effort into spelling? Do you ever choose not to read something because of it's presentation?
Finally, you are inconsiderate when you decide to go against conventions and make text harder to read for everybody else, because you find it inconvenient. You're like that asshole who talks too loud in the restaurant, that cuts people off when driving, or lets their dog shit on other peoples' lawns.
It takes a trivial amount of energy to add capitalization. Also, consider that people spend time reading information, and the more time they spend reading your information, the less time they have to read somebody else's information. So if it takes you a tiny amount of time to add capitals, the benefit is much more if you add up all the readers' time.
Finally, the better your information is presented, the better your information will be received. For example, you wouldn't send a resume to an employer full of spelling mistakes, bad grammar, and no capitalization. Similarly, people judge content based on it's presentation. I, for example, completely stopped reading your article when it became too tiresome.
Slashdot Mirror
Entertainment wants to be paid. People who write books to educate people want to be paid too, as do software developers who write utility software. Your medical information and what goes on inside the privacy of your home is also information. So are your personal computer files and surfing habits.
"information wants to be free" -- annoyingly simplistic slogan. Some people want the information to be free, some do not. The information itself doesn't want anything, unless you want to get all philosophical.
Paragraphs are your friends.
Blinking text and rainbow horizontal rules. Wow, 1995 lives.
I, for one, do not welcome my new Google overlord.
They just expanded what they meant by search. They didn't start out with the idea that they would host all the information. They crossed the line when they turned private email into something to be mined for profit. I don't see what being a competitor to eBay/PayPal has to do with search. Spending over a billion dollars on YouTube is not core to search.
Of course, if Google became the Internet itself, it would be easier for them to "organize the world's information", and that's where their argument ultimately leads. It's just empire building and making up bullshit excuses after the fact.
Ask Google the same question. They started out saying they were just going to do search. Now it's all about empire building -- wanting to host all the information themselves (hey great, they want all my email, search data, and now health information too), hiring like mad top talent without any particular direction in mind, buying companies at crazy prices left and right. Competing against companies like eBay/PayPal. The list goes on and on. Google is the new Microsoft.
Getting a job through somebody you know from a previous job happens all the time. Maybe it didn't work for you, but it's quite common. I have seen it over and over again and experienced it personally.
Off-topic? It's the topic of what is a "cult". Somebody gives a property that they think applies to cults, and comparisons to mainstream religions ensue -- completely on-topic. Catholic rituals are as bizarre as any cult's.
Yeah, whatever. You've just succumbed to the same "kill them to make the problem go away" mentality that you were railing against in the first place.
Not easy living with others, is it?
Your duck stories intrigue me, and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
What's art? What's pornography? Is art that is sexually titillating pornography? It's a close call. The title of the album is "Virgin Killer". The girl is in a sexually suggestive pose. Sex sells, and so does controversy.
Could the picture be even more sexually explicit, just for "shock" value, and would you still call it art? At one point might you think "too far"? This album cover skirts the line, no doubt, and if you read the Wikipedia article you'll see there was controversy about this cover when it was released.
I run Eclipse on Linux and it's not slow, except for startup time. It is a memory hog, no doubt about that.
"My God, this is an outrage! I was going to eat that mummy."
The problem is neither the term "atheist" nor "agnostic" accurately describes a position that I and a lot of people hold -- religion is mythology posing as truth, but the ultimate nature of reality is unknowable.
And just to complete the cycle...
You must be new here.
The word "modern" overly specifies your statement.
The point is if you value static type checking, no popular language has the features of C#. Java will probably get them in version 7 because of all the recent competition, which is a good thing (or maybe a new language like Scala will take over for Java).
So pointing to Python when you want to develop in a static language doesn't make for a good argument.
A little intellectual honesty, please. The implication was obvious.
There's a big difference between making minor mistakes and foregoing all capitalization. I spend time on my posts and proofread them, but I'm not perfect, nor do I expect anybody else to be.
I have a limited amount of time to read stuff, and also a limited patience for writing that is distracting and hard to read. Form matters -- that's why the conventions exist.
Why do you use paragraphs? Why do you put effort into spelling? Do you ever choose not to read something because of it's presentation?
Finally, you are inconsiderate when you decide to go against conventions and make text harder to read for everybody else, because you find it inconvenient. You're like that asshole who talks too loud in the restaurant, that cuts people off when driving, or lets their dog shit on other peoples' lawns.
It takes a trivial amount of energy to add capitalization. Also, consider that people spend time reading information, and the more time they spend reading your information, the less time they have to read somebody else's information. So if it takes you a tiny amount of time to add capitals, the benefit is much more if you add up all the readers' time.
Finally, the better your information is presented, the better your information will be received. For example, you wouldn't send a resume to an employer full of spelling mistakes, bad grammar, and no capitalization. Similarly, people judge content based on it's presentation. I, for example, completely stopped reading your article when it became too tiresome.