Then you have selective deafness. Most places the farmer pays the bee keeper or the bee keeper pays the farmer. Some crops don't need much pollination but produce lots of honey and vice versa. It is an ecology and the economics reflects that.
No. Anything with intelligence would recognise that as sarcasm just as they recognise your response to it is butt hurt nastiness. From either side of the political fence.
There is actually a minimum amount of ionising radiation needed for optimum health and that amount is non-zero. So, yes there is a legitimate RDA for radiation even if no one publishes one. In most places in the world the background radiation is below the optimum amount. Flying, X-rays etc add to that from the background.
This process (in general) is called 'hormesis' and applies in many other field.
Not so much power as privilege - private law. Power usually has responsibilities accompanying it and they sure do not want to be responsible for anything.
Well, she agrees she is autistic but was never his slave. He was just someone that helped her. According the her anyway. I am beginning to suspect people who make lurid up that are contrary to all evidence.
I do not think you read through your own references without a predetermined conclusion in mind. Your own references (even those quoted) do not support your contentions.
False. Larry does not follow any such creed. He plays at it. Play, fantasy.
He does say that it is his contention that some women enjoy this some of the time. He would appear to be correct as he has a number of active feminist ex-lovers supporting him. Reports of his general behaviour with and to women have been described by women and men (how would they know!) as exemplary.
There are also Gorean groups where gender is reversed. So what?
There is a difference between fantasy and real life. Accept that.
If he treated people as you claim you would have a point but he does not do so and you do not have a point.
Google should have cheated on the sort algorithm and put in their own add in top place: "A slab of muscle tissue from an immature castrated bull between two lumps of overheated grains stripped of their nutritional components, accompanied by...."
I don't think you can call yourself a C++ expert and be "totally unable to deal with" a C++ codebase that uses a different subset of C++ than what you would have used.
I totally agree. However that just tends to suggest that there are no expert C++ users. Just experts with a particular codebase. Which makes interviewing problematic.
Maybe there are more experts in the C language, because it is a simpler language and therefore an easier language to become an expert at. I would be totally in favor of using a simpler language for a project if there were no benefit to any of the more advanced features provided in C++, but that is rarely the case.
You toss that off lightly but I ponder its truth. It is problems and solutions that determine complexity. The question is not whether a language is simple or complex it is whether the language is appropriate to the solution. If it is then it will be simple. If it is not then the result will be complex. Complexity is seldom needed and never when simplicity will do. Human brains do not handle complexity well and the few that do do not handle it constantly or continuously. There is a lot to be said for keeping things simple.
You are quite correct. Everyone uses different subsets of C++. The consequence of this should be obvious. Do not use C++ in any circumstances where code has to be maintained. The next maintainer maybe totally unable to deal with it being an expert (and using) a different subset of C++.
If you take the assertion that the Universe is a simulation seriously, then rocks ARE designed objects, even though there is absolutely nothing about rocks to suggest that they actually are designed.
Non Sequiteur. That does not follow. The Universe could be designed to obey a few simple rules and evolve from that. Thusly the Universe can be a simulation and still require no design for rocks (or human beings).
What a crock to assume I live under cruddy legislation. Well, I do, but not in this matter. If I am injured on Australian roads I am covered. All the time.
Locally I had heard otherwise and it may differ here. A private vehicle and a car for hire are different registration requirements. One is private and one is commercial. And never the twain shall meet. The cost of registration and the cost (and terms) of the mandatory third party insurance differ. In law. I don't think Uber can change that.
They do not give two shits about their passengers either. I do not think their driver requirements are anything like stringent enough.
That will not continue. They are attempting monopoly. When they achieve it they will exploit it.
For me being in a taxi means that if there is an accident I am covered every way from Sunday. Regardless of who is at fault, regardless of medical insurance status, irregardless I will be covered and compensated for losses. If I travel in a Uber car, a paying fare, I am not covered at all, not even by the local mandatory third party insurance. A potential disaster.
Calling and using a cab provides limited information to the cab company. Using Uber reports my location (and god knows what else) to Uber 24/7 and I am even paying for the electricity and hardware to do it. While the cops may get such records form the phone company, Uber just demanding, taking them is an insult. Why would anyone sane accept those terms of service?
The intent of Uber is a world wide (or as wide as they can get) monopoly. Its business model is a losing proposition at its current pricing rates. When other alternatives (some better, some worse) have been wiped out it will exploit that monopoly and not only price wise. It will have the capacity to make areas popular or unpopular and all the influence that comes with that.
They are not even subtle about it. You know what "uber" means don't you? Google übermensch and uber alles.
No, what makes you a misandrist is the words that you used and the attitudes expressed. I do not do straw men.
You can be as supercilious as you wish but it gives you no credit. You are too young to be aware of many facts it seems. The 'safe spaces' for women goes back as far as the 'sixties. And I agree with it. But I do not agree with the same safe spaces being removed from men. Everyone needs a place where they can talk freely and do not need to constantly monitor their tongue. Even misandrists and misogynists.
Slashdot Mirror
Then you have selective deafness. Most places the farmer pays the bee keeper or the bee keeper pays the farmer. Some crops don't need much pollination but produce lots of honey and vice versa. It is an ecology and the economics reflects that.
It is reasonably certain (from France) that the use of new insecticides persist and weaken the hive enough to make varroa resistance hard.
No, been through that. It is only a worry if your habits change.
His name is....'Trumpelstiltskin'....
A vast majority you say? Just like the vast majority of Christians support the stoning and murder of adulterers? Grow up Ye of little todger.
Until you add in the C14
No. Anything with intelligence would recognise that as sarcasm just as they recognise your response to it is butt hurt nastiness. From either side of the political fence.
There is actually a minimum amount of ionising radiation needed for optimum health and that amount is non-zero. So, yes there is a legitimate RDA for radiation even if no one publishes one. In most places in the world the background radiation is below the optimum amount. Flying, X-rays etc add to that from the background.
This process (in general) is called 'hormesis' and applies in many other field.
Not so much power as privilege - private law. Power usually has responsibilities accompanying it and they sure do not want to be responsible for anything.
Well, she agrees she is autistic but was never his slave. He was just someone that helped her. According the her anyway. I am beginning to suspect people who make lurid up that are contrary to all evidence.
I do not think you read through your own references without a predetermined conclusion in mind. Your own references (even those quoted) do not support your contentions.
False. Larry does not follow any such creed. He plays at it. Play, fantasy.
He does say that it is his contention that some women enjoy this some of the time. He would appear to be correct as he has a number of active feminist ex-lovers supporting him. Reports of his general behaviour with and to women have been described by women and men (how would they know!) as exemplary.
There are also Gorean groups where gender is reversed. So what?
There is a difference between fantasy and real life. Accept that.
If he treated people as you claim you would have a point but he does not do so and you do not have a point.
False. Ask her.
Google should have cheated on the sort algorithm and put in their own add in top place: "A slab of muscle tissue from an immature castrated bull between two lumps of overheated grains stripped of their nutritional components, accompanied by...."
Where cuz?
I don't think you can call yourself a C++ expert and be "totally unable to deal with" a C++ codebase that uses a different subset of C++ than what you would have used.
I totally agree. However that just tends to suggest that there are no expert C++ users. Just experts with a particular codebase. Which makes interviewing problematic.
Maybe there are more experts in the C language, because it is a simpler language and therefore an easier language to become an expert at. I would be totally in favor of using a simpler language for a project if there were no benefit to any of the more advanced features provided in C++, but that is rarely the case.
You toss that off lightly but I ponder its truth. It is problems and solutions that determine complexity. The question is not whether a language is simple or complex it is whether the language is appropriate to the solution. If it is then it will be simple. If it is not then the result will be complex. Complexity is seldom needed and never when simplicity will do. Human brains do not handle complexity well and the few that do do not handle it constantly or continuously. There is a lot to be said for keeping things simple.
You are quite correct. Everyone uses different subsets of C++. The consequence of this should be obvious. Do not use C++ in any circumstances where code has to be maintained. The next maintainer maybe totally unable to deal with it being an expert (and using) a different subset of C++.
It did reveal something unexpected. The only company honest about it are Apple. It is a surprise that any company lived up to its claims.
You did not read what I said, and are inverting the logic.
Well I did the first time (but not this time) and I agreed with you pretty well. But you got formal and I pointed out a formal error.
As for the rest, I am not arguing.
If you take the assertion that the Universe is a simulation seriously, then rocks ARE designed objects, even though there is absolutely nothing about rocks to suggest that they actually are designed.
Non Sequiteur. That does not follow. The Universe could be designed to obey a few simple rules and evolve from that. Thusly the Universe can be a simulation and still require no design for rocks (or human beings).
What a crock to assume I live under cruddy legislation. Well, I do, but not in this matter. If I am injured on Australian roads I am covered. All the time.
Locally I had heard otherwise and it may differ here. A private vehicle and a car for hire are different registration requirements. One is private and one is commercial. And never the twain shall meet. The cost of registration and the cost (and terms) of the mandatory third party insurance differ. In law. I don't think Uber can change that.
They do not give two shits about their passengers either. I do not think their driver requirements are anything like stringent enough.
That will not continue. They are attempting monopoly. When they achieve it they will exploit it.
For me being in a taxi means that if there is an accident I am covered every way from Sunday. Regardless of who is at fault, regardless of medical insurance status, irregardless I will be covered and compensated for losses. If I travel in a Uber car, a paying fare, I am not covered at all, not even by the local mandatory third party insurance. A potential disaster.
Calling and using a cab provides limited information to the cab company. Using Uber reports my location (and god knows what else) to Uber 24/7 and I am even paying for the electricity and hardware to do it. While the cops may get such records form the phone company, Uber just demanding, taking them is an insult. Why would anyone sane accept those terms of service?
The intent of Uber is a world wide (or as wide as they can get) monopoly. Its business model is a losing proposition at its current pricing rates. When other alternatives (some better, some worse) have been wiped out it will exploit that monopoly and not only price wise. It will have the capacity to make areas popular or unpopular and all the influence that comes with that.
They are not even subtle about it. You know what "uber" means don't you? Google übermensch and uber alles.
Erp.....
I see. You did mean inverse.
There are rules (or at least strong suggestions) in English that many users of English are not aware of.
inverse: opposite or contrary in position, direction, order, or effect
converse: corresponding yet opposing
No, what makes you a misandrist is the words that you used and the attitudes expressed. I do not do straw men.
You can be as supercilious as you wish but it gives you no credit. You are too young to be aware of many facts it seems. The 'safe spaces' for women goes back as far as the 'sixties. And I agree with it. But I do not agree with the same safe spaces being removed from men. Everyone needs a place where they can talk freely and do not need to constantly monitor their tongue. Even misandrists and misogynists.