Sorry, but we refuse to give into neo-Nazism. We are learning from Germany's big mistake to not just go with the evil flow.
Go ahead and invoke Godwin's Law. If it quacks like a duck, waddles like a duck, smells like a duck, and has funny hair like a duck, it's probably a friggen duck.
As the webmaster, I got a vague notice something like, "To whom it may concern, please remove item X from your commerce site. The site in question is not authorized to sell X. Contact us at [phone and email] immediately to resolve this!"
I dismissed it as spam/phishing because it had no specifics. It was like a form-letter (generic template). It didn't mention or our site URL nor identify the page and date spotted.
A few weeks later some angry lawyers called our org and complained that we ignored their request. I mentioned that I saw the message but dismissed it as spam, but kind of got chewed out for not forwarding it to management. (Unfortunately, I couldn't recover it, long story.)
They didn't understand that I got lot of similar spam trying to trick one into calling or emailing so as to put the respondees on a sucker list, and that lack of specifics was usually a sign of foul play.
In the future, I started forwarding such things with the message, "Boss, this is probably spam, but you may want to review..."
I think initially they were okay with that approach, but started getting annoyed by it, but couldn't formulate a decent alternative forwarding rule. Eventually the company folded, making it a non-issue.
If you know of spam filters that are 100% reliable, or even 99%, we'd like to know about them.
There are vast networks of people around the world who are paid to get around spam filters and try to stay one step ahead of them. The filter companies will usually take at least a couple of hours to identify new spam patterns and set up filtering criteria, and it may take yet longer to propagate the patterns to the customers' spam catalogs.
My experience with similar orgs is that the executives want instant connectivity, even when at home or at "important" conferences (cough cough). The executives out-rank most IT security personnel, and thus if they want risky toys/access, they get risky toys/access.
County government is very rank-sensitive. Logic is secondary to rank. Powerful idiots are dangerous.
I always considered the "Nigerian Prince" thing to be a complete joke; for the spammers can claim to be anybody from any country such that the Nigerian connection here sounds dodgy.
I dare a politician to run on "dumpster food ain't so bad; stop complaining; and veterinarians make better doctors for humans than human doctors in the middle ages."
I wouldn't go that far. Their reasoning is arguably legitimate, BUT they don't directly admit to the unpleasant or complex consequences of their system.
It's essentially a modified Social Darwinism (SD) argument: to keep our citizens competitive we have to cull the herd by letting the sick and lazy wither or die, with some caveats given later.
Some citizens have to be the sacrificial lambs to keep US citizens strong and competitive.
It's a legitimate perspective, but they don't WANT to fully tell you the plan because it's embarrassing to admit to; similar to how many didn't tell pollsters that they were voting for T: he's says nutty and shameful things.
I should point out that some will claim, and perhaps even believe, that if you lower taxes and reduce regulations enough, the economy will be unleashed and "float all boats" such that there is minimal human suffering by even the laziest or sickest. Therefore, if you "do conservatism right", the down-sides of SD are minimal, and therefore GOP are not really the iron-hearted human breeders that pure SD requires.
The problem is that trickle-down has been failing in practice for several decades. It doesn't work, but they won't admit it, saying you merely "are not trying hard enough" (like you hear with many IT and project management fads).
Also, they believe churches can and will help out for the sick and afflicted. While true in many cases, it fails during deep recessions, which overwhelm churches due to both the volume and reduced donations.
And it could result in atheists, Muslims, etc. being discriminated against for having the "wrong" beliefs. The biggest churches will have the most control and influence over care. Progressives view such as an evangelical "sales" gimmick: we'll feed you if you listen to our religious spam. If you as an evangelical believe your religion is the right religion, you are okay with this lopsided influence because God is on your side and wants the system to promote The Correct religious system.
Thus, conservatives and libertarians have a valid perspective, given certain assumptions, but are usually not straight-forward about the assumptions and trade-offs of their reasoning system. Most know it's an ugly sell, not foo far off from Nazism, and try to dress it up with fluff and distraction.
And do you know why [lambdas] appear everywhere? Because they're really fucking useful.
I have to disagree. Almost every use-case I've seen for them is because either the language, including Java, also has a poor OOP model (which you seem to agree to later), or the API is poorly designed.
For example, why can't one add an OnClick method *directly* to a button object? Why go through the Listener middle-man thingy? That's silly. 98% of the time a GUI implementer shouldn't have to give a damn about a Listener engine; that should mostly be hidden guts.
but the contortions you have to go through to compensate for [strong typing] introduce new ones.
I kind of agree. I wish languages were better designed to be strong/static, and dynamic where needed instead of all or nothing. Root API's are usually best as strong/static typing, but the outer layers usually best as dynamic. It would be nice to declare some modules as strict and others dynamic.
The nature of work is changing; that's possibly why disability claims for mental disorders are going up. In the old days most simply put widgets into wadgets all day. Although boring, it's rather straight forward and predictable. Now more have to deal with office politics, which can get ugly, personal, and stressful.
The industry prefers a strongly typed language for certain mission-critical applications, but the choices are dwindling there. Dynamic languages are just a poor fit for certain applications.
JavaScript is not a viable alternative also because it has an awkward OOP model and/or syntax that forces one to over-use anonymous functions or lamdbas.
If you are good at your job, nobody can replace you...
There may be a small percentage who are "elite", but if we put our stubborn egos aside, the reality is that most of us are replaceable, and if somebody in Timbuktu can do your job for 1/4 your salary, that's far too attractive for a bean counter to ignore, even if some intangibles may be against it.
There is enough Management by Spreadsheet being done that the intangibles will be ignored because those managing by spreadsheet won't know and won't care about the intangibles being ignored. The cogs of bean-countery will dump your ass for a cheaper brain.
If the public sees DNC's dirty laundry but not the RNC's dirty laundry, then the public is getting lopsided information. It would be like Candidate A having to release their taxes but Candidate B doesn't have to because Putin said so.
Most a centrist. Besides, there are plenty of right-leaning news outlets such as Fox, Breitbart, WND, and Infowars. Are you implying some kind of mass discrimination conspiracy?
some flash components provide backend support and don't even have a UI
Can you give examples of such that are actually useful for something besides spam?
If by chance such were actually needed, then a prompt can point out that it's a back-end component with no visible representation, and could ask the user if they want to run it, perhaps with an option to approve it "forever" for a given page and/or site to avoid repeated prompts.
His view is that better negotiations will open up opportunities to sell more in countries we do a lot trade with it. Currently it's usually lopsided trade, and he wants to fix that with negotiations to have more 2-way trade.
Whether he can actually pull that off is another matter. It's going to be an interesting 4 years...
There are no definitive studies either way. We cannot kill them and dissect their neurons to find out exactly why they do what they do, so we have to rely on indirect information and speculation.
I do see a general trend with conservatism that is anti-subject-expert. Do you disagree with this observation?
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps you should shift your history marker another 7 or so years before that.
Sorry, but we refuse to give into neo-Nazism. We are learning from Germany's big mistake to not just go with the evil flow.
Go ahead and invoke Godwin's Law. If it quacks like a duck, waddles like a duck, smells like a duck, and has funny hair like a duck, it's probably a friggen duck.
I had the opposite happen to me once.
As the webmaster, I got a vague notice something like, "To whom it may concern, please remove item X from your commerce site. The site in question is not authorized to sell X. Contact us at [phone and email] immediately to resolve this!"
I dismissed it as spam/phishing because it had no specifics. It was like a form-letter (generic template). It didn't mention or our site URL nor identify the page and date spotted.
A few weeks later some angry lawyers called our org and complained that we ignored their request. I mentioned that I saw the message but dismissed it as spam, but kind of got chewed out for not forwarding it to management. (Unfortunately, I couldn't recover it, long story.)
They didn't understand that I got lot of similar spam trying to trick one into calling or emailing so as to put the respondees on a sucker list, and that lack of specifics was usually a sign of foul play.
In the future, I started forwarding such things with the message, "Boss, this is probably spam, but you may want to review..."
I think initially they were okay with that approach, but started getting annoyed by it, but couldn't formulate a decent alternative forwarding rule. Eventually the company folded, making it a non-issue.
If you know of spam filters that are 100% reliable, or even 99%, we'd like to know about them.
There are vast networks of people around the world who are paid to get around spam filters and try to stay one step ahead of them. The filter companies will usually take at least a couple of hours to identify new spam patterns and set up filtering criteria, and it may take yet longer to propagate the patterns to the customers' spam catalogs.
You can get it back by sending your bank account info to InstantRefund@sucker.foo
My experience with similar orgs is that the executives want instant connectivity, even when at home or at "important" conferences (cough cough). The executives out-rank most IT security personnel, and thus if they want risky toys/access, they get risky toys/access.
County government is very rank-sensitive. Logic is secondary to rank. Powerful idiots are dangerous.
I always considered the "Nigerian Prince" thing to be a complete joke; for the spammers can claim to be anybody from any country such that the Nigerian connection here sounds dodgy.
What's next, the butler actually did it?
I dare a politician to run on "dumpster food ain't so bad; stop complaining; and veterinarians make better doctors for humans than human doctors in the middle ages."
I wouldn't go that far. Their reasoning is arguably legitimate, BUT they don't directly admit to the unpleasant or complex consequences of their system.
It's essentially a modified Social Darwinism (SD) argument: to keep our citizens competitive we have to cull the herd by letting the sick and lazy wither or die, with some caveats given later.
Some citizens have to be the sacrificial lambs to keep US citizens strong and competitive.
It's a legitimate perspective, but they don't WANT to fully tell you the plan because it's embarrassing to admit to; similar to how many didn't tell pollsters that they were voting for T: he's says nutty and shameful things.
I should point out that some will claim, and perhaps even believe, that if you lower taxes and reduce regulations enough, the economy will be unleashed and "float all boats" such that there is minimal human suffering by even the laziest or sickest. Therefore, if you "do conservatism right", the down-sides of SD are minimal, and therefore GOP are not really the iron-hearted human breeders that pure SD requires.
The problem is that trickle-down has been failing in practice for several decades. It doesn't work, but they won't admit it, saying you merely "are not trying hard enough" (like you hear with many IT and project management fads).
Also, they believe churches can and will help out for the sick and afflicted. While true in many cases, it fails during deep recessions, which overwhelm churches due to both the volume and reduced donations.
And it could result in atheists, Muslims, etc. being discriminated against for having the "wrong" beliefs. The biggest churches will have the most control and influence over care. Progressives view such as an evangelical "sales" gimmick: we'll feed you if you listen to our religious spam. If you as an evangelical believe your religion is the right religion, you are okay with this lopsided influence because God is on your side and wants the system to promote The Correct religious system.
Thus, conservatives and libertarians have a valid perspective, given certain assumptions, but are usually not straight-forward about the assumptions and trade-offs of their reasoning system. Most know it's an ugly sell, not foo far off from Nazism, and try to dress it up with fluff and distraction.
Indeed. MS playing nice today != play nice tomorrow.
Look at all the snoopware and install tricks they played with Windows 10 recently. The Gatesian Evil still lurks in the culture of that corporation.
The cheese may be delicious, but that doesn't mean you are not inside a trap.
I have to disagree. Almost every use-case I've seen for them is because either the language, including Java, also has a poor OOP model (which you seem to agree to later), or the API is poorly designed.
For example, why can't one add an OnClick method *directly* to a button object? Why go through the Listener middle-man thingy? That's silly. 98% of the time a GUI implementer shouldn't have to give a damn about a Listener engine; that should mostly be hidden guts.
I kind of agree. I wish languages were better designed to be strong/static, and dynamic where needed instead of all or nothing. Root API's are usually best as strong/static typing, but the outer layers usually best as dynamic. It would be nice to declare some modules as strict and others dynamic.
The nature of work is changing; that's possibly why disability claims for mental disorders are going up. In the old days most simply put widgets into wadgets all day. Although boring, it's rather straight forward and predictable. Now more have to deal with office politics, which can get ugly, personal, and stressful.
If keep going through life talking like that, eventually you'll get caught. He's said raunchy things on Howard Stern also. It's not a one-shot thing.
The industry prefers a strongly typed language for certain mission-critical applications, but the choices are dwindling there. Dynamic languages are just a poor fit for certain applications.
JavaScript is not a viable alternative also because it has an awkward OOP model and/or syntax that forces one to over-use anonymous functions or lamdbas.
The rats know the Oracle Ship is burning and are trying to milk every last drop from the Java cash cow before they scurry into rafts.
There may be a small percentage who are "elite", but if we put our stubborn egos aside, the reality is that most of us are replaceable, and if somebody in Timbuktu can do your job for 1/4 your salary, that's far too attractive for a bean counter to ignore, even if some intangibles may be against it.
There is enough Management by Spreadsheet being done that the intangibles will be ignored because those managing by spreadsheet won't know and won't care about the intangibles being ignored. The cogs of bean-countery will dump your ass for a cheaper brain.
If the public sees DNC's dirty laundry but not the RNC's dirty laundry, then the public is getting lopsided information. It would be like Candidate A having to release their taxes but Candidate B doesn't have to because Putin said so.
How about another billion investigations. Trump will even make her pay for them.
Most a centrist. Besides, there are plenty of right-leaning news outlets such as Fox, Breitbart, WND, and Infowars. Are you implying some kind of mass discrimination conspiracy?
Can you give examples of such that are actually useful for something besides spam?
If by chance such were actually needed, then a prompt can point out that it's a back-end component with no visible representation, and could ask the user if they want to run it, perhaps with an option to approve it "forever" for a given page and/or site to avoid repeated prompts.
We are already giving a Trumposaurus a shot.
Booya!
http://www.businessinsider.com...
It seems contradictory, but perhaps not.
His view is that better negotiations will open up opportunities to sell more in countries we do a lot trade with it. Currently it's usually lopsided trade, and he wants to fix that with negotiations to have more 2-way trade.
Whether he can actually pull that off is another matter. It's going to be an interesting 4 years...
You are 6,500 years too late to complain about taxes.
But, if we find some DNA, maybe we can bring dinosaurs back. Make Dino's Great Again!
There are no definitive studies either way. We cannot kill them and dissect their neurons to find out exactly why they do what they do, so we have to rely on indirect information and speculation.
I do see a general trend with conservatism that is anti-subject-expert. Do you disagree with this observation?