Clearly I believe there is a difference between a human and a spider, since I talked about a couple of those differences in my second paragraph. I think that the morals in this area become very complex, and blanket statements aren't likely to be correct. Preserving species is a good thing, but allowing ourselves (as the strongest species) to be dominant is a good thing too. We don't need to all go live in the forest and eat figs or whatever so that weaker species will be happy.
I do think that we can do a better job of keeping more natural habitats in their original states, and in reducing our environmental footprint. We no longer need to advance in terms of ruling over areas of land - we've already won that battle. Instead our advancement as a species can be in our social and technical (and etc.) achievements.
The most important step we need to take toward this goal is being able to purposely limit our own population. We need to reduce our rate of reproduction. This would help solve many major global issues, but it's such a difficult topic that many people don't even want to discuss it. The desire to have many offspring goes very deep, but it can be overcome as a part of our social evolution. I believe population reduction (through natural attrition over time) is the only way we will truly achieve a balance on earth. So long as we are 6 billion, 10 billion, or 15 billion, we're inevitably going to stomp on the planet's resources. With such numbers we can only try to limit and contain our impact, but we can't hope to reach a comfortable balance.
We kill because we are doing what we're wired up to do. We are satisfying our needs and inherent desires as a species. Just like lions have probably wiped out several species due to their desire to eat and to be dominant. It's all part of a natural process, and it's not necessarily evil.
The only difference is that we're the first species able to understand all this, and the first species that needs to exhibit self-control because we actually have the ability to really screw things up globally. We should save every species we can, but to have only lost one with all that's changed in the past 50 years is actually a credit to us.
The best way I've found to stop this is to delete QTTask.exe. Actually, I always just rename it to QTTask.exe.DIE.DIE.DIE.
But yeah, it's lame. Too many developers seem to think their software is so important that it needs to sit there in memory all the time. Less is more, I say!
Can't we just skip ahead to the transparent crystals that glow in various colors and store almost limitless data? We all know that's where this is heading.
Maybe we need to perfect holographic 3D displays first?
Why do they always describe this sort of technology as "smart" and then throw in the stupidest features imaginable? I can't imagine anyone being helped by a mirror that dispenses fashion advice. It's just there because they had the technology to make it possible, but not the common sense to resist making something flashy and worthless.
Re:What backwards compatibility has it broken?
on
PHP 5.2.0 Released
·
· Score: 2, Informative
First of all, it's trivial to run two versions of PHP on the same server, and to use one version or the other on a per-directory or per-file basis. So there's no reason old code needs to stop being run if it's still useful.
Secondofly, the changes from back around 4.0 to where we are now with 5.2 are fundamentally huge, and they move PHP to a much more serious, professional class. Breaking backwards compatibility was worth it. It's sad that there has been so much resistance to change. Personally, these changes are the reason I now favor PHP as my language of choice for web development.
I agree that PHP can encourage a quick-and-dirty approach, and that the language is not perfect. The function naming and lack of namespaces are poor, and internationalization has a long way to go.
That being said, I believe it is possible to create high quality, professional, maintainable code with PHP. If it wasn't the case, large companies such as Yahoo wouldn't be adopting it. PHP has an emphasis on productivity, and it doesn't attempt to enforce good practices in the language structure itself. But it also doesn't prevent a skilled programmer from using good practices. If you are having so many difficulties with your projects, you may want to take a look at who is writing the code.
I'm not discounting that you have some valid points, but I also think your view is overly harsh. I've worked in many different languages, and they all have their faults. I find myself favoring PHP because it allows me to get good work done efficiently.
It would be funny (and EXTREMELY clever of them) if Microsoft had bought Duke Nukem Forever a long time ago, and were going to release it *for free* as a Vista-only game on the same day that the consumer level Vista is released.
Just imagine the press, the hype, the people saying "screw it, time to upgrade."
This looks wonderful! I am definitely part of that niche that wants simplicity in a phone.
However, I'm still not a cell phone customer, because the service is still too expensive. I could afford it, but paying $500-$800 a year for phone service just isn't appealing to me. Unfortunately, there's not much motivation for cell companies to work on pushing down prices when such a great portion of the population seems perfectly willing to stay at $40+ per month price point. So until it gets cheaper, I'll be sticking with my Skype permanent phone number for under $4 per month, thank you very much.
You are completely right. The guy does have a point - if everyone would just buy a bunch of CD's for $60 or $70 each, the music industry would have money to support lots more bands or do anything else they wanted. And if I could just sell one glass of my 10 million dollar lemonade, I could retire.
It simply doesn't cost very much to record music and print CDs any longer. Sure, you can spend millions in the recording studio, but you can also produce good quality, professional recordings at more rational prices.
I'd love to see an upstart company start selling CDs for $5 each. If they signed some promising bands and got Walmart to distribute, they could easily sell a few million copies per release. If the band gets $1 per CD and the company profits $1, everyone should be happy.
It's actually very cost effective to offer the X-Prize for the climber now. By the time we can actually make the cable, in 50-100 years, hopefully all the good ideas for the climber design will have become public domain. Spend a few million now, and you don't have to spend billions to license the technology later.
...is vector-based uber-scaling. I want a desktop that looks basically the same when I switch resolutions, with icons and fonts scaled appropriately. Vista has the necessary scaling and vector capabilities in place, but I'm guessing it doesn't support this. Or does it?
This article is such a poorly written mess. I've looked over it twice and I don't think I even know which side the EC is taking on net neutrality. (I know, I know, that's what I get for RTFA...)
"Sir, I can see you're feeling... 'furious'... I am sorry. The Windows software is only trying to protect you from piracy."
"Wha... what? How am I threatened by pirates?"
"I understand you are... 'confused'... Allow me to help. Windows is simply ensuring that you have a genuine, complete, unbroken copy of the software."
"So windows is making sure I can use my computer by not allowing me to use it?"
"We simply want to ensure you do not accidentally have an illegal copy of windows from a source that is not trustworthy."
"You want me to prove I'm not guilty so that there's no chance you're not making money? Why you..."
"Sir, you seem to be feeling... Um, there are too many emotion words scrolling on the screen, I can't read them fast enough. Oh shit, I shouldn't have told you about the emotion words."
"I. Will. Kill. You. Dead."
"Ok, looks like we've settled on 'furious' again. Do you have a credit card handy? Sir?" (It looks like he hung up. Now the screen is telling me to lock the call center doors.)
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, maybe you could use these 'goggles' to put unnecessary 'quotes' around everything you 'see'!
Clearly I believe there is a difference between a human and a spider, since I talked about a couple of those differences in my second paragraph. I think that the morals in this area become very complex, and blanket statements aren't likely to be correct. Preserving species is a good thing, but allowing ourselves (as the strongest species) to be dominant is a good thing too. We don't need to all go live in the forest and eat figs or whatever so that weaker species will be happy.
I do think that we can do a better job of keeping more natural habitats in their original states, and in reducing our environmental footprint. We no longer need to advance in terms of ruling over areas of land - we've already won that battle. Instead our advancement as a species can be in our social and technical (and etc.) achievements.
The most important step we need to take toward this goal is being able to purposely limit our own population. We need to reduce our rate of reproduction. This would help solve many major global issues, but it's such a difficult topic that many people don't even want to discuss it. The desire to have many offspring goes very deep, but it can be overcome as a part of our social evolution. I believe population reduction (through natural attrition over time) is the only way we will truly achieve a balance on earth. So long as we are 6 billion, 10 billion, or 15 billion, we're inevitably going to stomp on the planet's resources. With such numbers we can only try to limit and contain our impact, but we can't hope to reach a comfortable balance.
We kill because we are doing what we're wired up to do. We are satisfying our needs and inherent desires as a species. Just like lions have probably wiped out several species due to their desire to eat and to be dominant. It's all part of a natural process, and it's not necessarily evil.
The only difference is that we're the first species able to understand all this, and the first species that needs to exhibit self-control because we actually have the ability to really screw things up globally. We should save every species we can, but to have only lost one with all that's changed in the past 50 years is actually a credit to us.
The best way I've found to stop this is to delete QTTask.exe. Actually, I always just rename it to QTTask.exe.DIE.DIE.DIE.
But yeah, it's lame. Too many developers seem to think their software is so important that it needs to sit there in memory all the time. Less is more, I say!
Can't we just skip ahead to the transparent crystals that glow in various colors and store almost limitless data? We all know that's where this is heading.
Maybe we need to perfect holographic 3D displays first?
Well, profound truth is profound truth, after all.
Hey, come on. Nullity is a perfectly cromulent number!
Why do they always describe this sort of technology as "smart" and then throw in the stupidest features imaginable? I can't imagine anyone being helped by a mirror that dispenses fashion advice. It's just there because they had the technology to make it possible, but not the common sense to resist making something flashy and worthless.
First of all, it's trivial to run two versions of PHP on the same server, and to use one version or the other on a per-directory or per-file basis. So there's no reason old code needs to stop being run if it's still useful.
Secondofly, the changes from back around 4.0 to where we are now with 5.2 are fundamentally huge, and they move PHP to a much more serious, professional class. Breaking backwards compatibility was worth it. It's sad that there has been so much resistance to change. Personally, these changes are the reason I now favor PHP as my language of choice for web development.
I agree that PHP can encourage a quick-and-dirty approach, and that the language is not perfect. The function naming and lack of namespaces are poor, and internationalization has a long way to go.
That being said, I believe it is possible to create high quality, professional, maintainable code with PHP. If it wasn't the case, large companies such as Yahoo wouldn't be adopting it. PHP has an emphasis on productivity, and it doesn't attempt to enforce good practices in the language structure itself. But it also doesn't prevent a skilled programmer from using good practices. If you are having so many difficulties with your projects, you may want to take a look at who is writing the code.
I'm not discounting that you have some valid points, but I also think your view is overly harsh. I've worked in many different languages, and they all have their faults. I find myself favoring PHP because it allows me to get good work done efficiently.
Because Sony's not losing any money from this, it's only their customers losing money.
(I feel like this whole discussion is a cynicism/sarcasm contest. How'd I do?) :)
It would be funny (and EXTREMELY clever of them) if Microsoft had bought Duke Nukem Forever a long time ago, and were going to release it *for free* as a Vista-only game on the same day that the consumer level Vista is released.
Just imagine the press, the hype, the people saying "screw it, time to upgrade."
Talk about your killer app...
The Guinness Wave ad (actually pretty cool)
6 8549381115
http://youtube.com/watch?v=_p7_55d8u5E
The Hovis ad:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=CFLBvLxLJMI
Guinness de-evolution ad:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-35082435
Bigot.
This looks wonderful! I am definitely part of that niche that wants simplicity in a phone.
However, I'm still not a cell phone customer, because the service is still too expensive. I could afford it, but paying $500-$800 a year for phone service just isn't appealing to me. Unfortunately, there's not much motivation for cell companies to work on pushing down prices when such a great portion of the population seems perfectly willing to stay at $40+ per month price point. So until it gets cheaper, I'll be sticking with my Skype permanent phone number for under $4 per month, thank you very much.
You are completely right. The guy does have a point - if everyone would just buy a bunch of CD's for $60 or $70 each, the music industry would have money to support lots more bands or do anything else they wanted. And if I could just sell one glass of my 10 million dollar lemonade, I could retire.
It simply doesn't cost very much to record music and print CDs any longer. Sure, you can spend millions in the recording studio, but you can also produce good quality, professional recordings at more rational prices.
I'd love to see an upstart company start selling CDs for $5 each. If they signed some promising bands and got Walmart to distribute, they could easily sell a few million copies per release. If the band gets $1 per CD and the company profits $1, everyone should be happy.
I can't say I'm following you here. How many beaver hides and gallons of maple syrup is that?
It's actually very cost effective to offer the X-Prize for the climber now. By the time we can actually make the cable, in 50-100 years, hopefully all the good ideas for the climber design will have become public domain. Spend a few million now, and you don't have to spend billions to license the technology later.
Cell phone users are hopeless. Of course they'll care.
Furthermore, you can bet that Apple will get it right where others like Sprint couldn't.
Personally, I just hope you can use that iPod circular input as a rotary dial!
...is vector-based uber-scaling. I want a desktop that looks basically the same when I switch resolutions, with icons and fonts scaled appropriately. Vista has the necessary scaling and vector capabilities in place, but I'm guessing it doesn't support this. Or does it?
This article is such a poorly written mess. I've looked over it twice and I don't think I even know which side the EC is taking on net neutrality. (I know, I know, that's what I get for RTFA...)
For anyone who doesn't get the reference:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k_Gn6a3WbYw
Fair Use is a separate badge, but to earn it you have to break the DMCA laws, which ironically gets you kicked out of scouts.
"Hello, Microsoft Customer Service."
... I am sorry. The Windows software is only trying to protect you from piracy."
... Allow me to help. Windows is simply ensuring that you have a genuine, complete, unbroken copy of the software."
"Why is windows accusing me of stealing it?"
"Sir, I can see you're feeling... 'furious'
"Wha... what? How am I threatened by pirates?"
"I understand you are... 'confused'
"So windows is making sure I can use my computer by not allowing me to use it?"
"We simply want to ensure you do not accidentally have an illegal copy of windows from a source that is not trustworthy."
"You want me to prove I'm not guilty so that there's no chance you're not making money? Why you..."
"Sir, you seem to be feeling... Um, there are too many emotion words scrolling on the screen, I can't read them fast enough. Oh shit, I shouldn't have told you about the emotion words."
"I. Will. Kill. You. Dead."
"Ok, looks like we've settled on 'furious' again. Do you have a credit card handy? Sir?" (It looks like he hung up. Now the screen is telling me to lock the call center doors.)
Bets like these are not conducive to weight loss!
(Just a heads up to anyone who may be reading this thread for weight loss information.)