Imagine a very tall man named Tim.
Now imagine that he personally decides to nickname himself "Tiny Tim."
That is humor, even if it might not be overly effective humor.
Now imagine that he introduces himself to some guy, lets call him Bob.
"Hi Bob, nice to meet you, I'm Tiny Tim."
Then Bob replies, "Since when is someone more than six feet tall tiny! Ha, ha, ha!"
This is not humor.
In your last post, you were a Bob.
Your post would have been acceptable if it referenced a ukulele.
He claims that he has discovered a new humor technology which is a combination of irony technology and sarcasm technology, so-called "sarcastic irony;" unfortunately, this new form of humor may disprove the theories of quantum mechanics, so I think it is all a cheap trick to get VC (venture comedian) money.
Yes, there is a set of beliefs that comprise normative Christianity, and that is most definitely not it. I am assuming that this is an actual sect that you are a member of, and not something you are just making up. What is your group's name? I have honestly never heard anything even close to that.
Just for the benefit of any non-Christian out there who is reading this and honestly wondering: this is not even remotely close to any standard Christian belief.
This too is an arbitrary limit.
How much of a brain is enough to be human?
What about the one who was at 95% of the proscribed legal definition? Really sucks to be them.
Here is the way I see it personally.
I don't view sperm or eggs as human.
I don't view something of a few thousand cells as human.
I do view a newborn infant human, and I do view a 4-month old (what is the youngest surviving premature birth anyway? I don't know) as a human, whether it is in the womb or out of it.
Whenever the thing stops being a "thing" and starts being a human is when it stops being a medical procedure and starts being infanticide.
I don't know where the line is, but I think it is quite early in the pregnancy, around a month or less.
I view it as better to unnecessarily infringe upon a medical procedure than it is to unnecessarily allow for the alternative.
It is better to err on the side of caution.
Wow, you really did a number on that straw man there, all of those crazy Christians who view the start of human life to be before conception.
All three of them.
Is it acceptable to kill a 2-week old baby outside of the womb?
I was born almost a month overdue, so would it have been acceptable to kill me at what would have been 2-weeks old normally?
Just because I was still inside my mother's womb?
What about a prematurely-born child of 6-months?
Is killing it okay?
If not, then what about a 6-month old that is still in the womb?
Why is there a distinction?
When a person is born is actually a very arbitrary point of time.
When a person is conceived is not.
And instead of debating these sort of things rationally, people who support certain viewpoints just throw insults, because they know they can't win with the facts.
This is a lot of the reason why "science" in general is looked down upon.
Instead of actual scientific processes, which focus upon rational conclusions, most of their exposure is to so-called "scientists" who are after nothing more besides a political, social, or religious agenda using the title of "Science" as a method to avoid debate.
"You can't disagree with me!
Science says so!
I just asked it yesterday!
Speaking of poetry, one of my favorite poets, Walt Whitman, was very guilty of changing his work. His primary work, Leaves of Grass, went through more editions than I know about. I have a book with the original 1855 version, but most people haven't seen it. At the time it was seen as a novel practice, but now looking back I wonder if it was a mistake. Instead of rewriting the same poems and adding a few new to the same volume, perhaps he should have instead have just written the new ones, in new volumes? And left Leaves of Grass as it was in 1855? Or perhaps not. It allows for a good insight to the changes in his thought, since I can compare them.
Re: Vi Modes Considered Harmful
on
Vim 6.4 Released
·
· Score: 1
Vim rocks:
Control-P
It's like the IDDQD for typing.
This "war-mongering theocracy," which permits the practice or non-practice of any religion, just established a giant nominally Muslim democracy, possibly against our own interests. Are you free to practice (or not practice) any religion in your country? When was the last time your country replaced a dictator in another nation with a democratic government?
Most Americans are Christians of some form, myself included, and a small but vocal minority of so-called Christians do push their own agendas, but most of us ignore them; I don't believe that the Republicans serve them, although the Republicans do tolerate them.
I don't know what country you are in, but if their intellectual idols are Castro, the French, and Chavez, then it has some serious problems.
And no, it doesn't really matter: at least not to us.
I think the article's author is pretty new to computers.
Wow!
I can boot any computer from something I carry around!
I think I know what USB flash drives are.
I generally prefer
this,
or at worst
this.
No, they should be for the recording industry, because they are the Recording Industry Association of America; and they seem to be doing everything in their power to protect their member's interests. If it disagrees with the interests of the musicians, then so be it, as far as they are concerned.
Presumably there is some "Musician's Association of America", but they have apparently been doing a horrible job for decades.
* (|Great news?| 'this) T ; That's right, that is a space in a variable name. ; Just be glad I didn't put in a newline (cause I can). ; suckOnThat, camelCaseRetards.
Here is a simple example. There is no "while" loop in Common Lisp, but I think it sometimes makes the code clearer. With it, I can write (while (> x 10) stuff... stuff... stuff...)
;;; A WHILE macro, operating in a matter similar to the while loop in C. (defmacro while (conditional &rest body) `(do () ((not,conditional)) ,@body))
Along the same lines, I defined an "until", which is of course achievable in C by while (!whatever()) { stuff... stuff... stuff... } but I view it as more clear as well.
;;; An UNTIL macro. (defmacro until (conditional &rest body) `(while (not,conditional) ,@body))
Now I can write (until (x <= 10) stuff... stuff... stuff...) If that makes my intentions clearer. This has the exact same results as above, but the difference can mean a lot to me when I try to understand the code later on.
I am reasonably certain that these are impossible in Python, especially in any way that would add clarity, which is the whole point. I am absolutely certain that it is literally impossible in C, C++, Java, Fortran, Cobol, Perl, and basically anything else.
Common Lisp macros allow you to code what you mean, not just something which happens to be functionally equivalent.
I have had troubles because my resume is in Latex.
Apparently there are some people in HR departments out there who can't even figure out what to do with a PDF.
You are right, one cannot learn C# in an afternoon: it took me about two weeks.
Of course, I had been programming in C for about 8 years before then, and both C++ and Python for about 4 years, so it was easy.
C# is very much just a more "C++"-ish Python or Java, so it didn't exactly take very long to learn the new syntax for the old ideas.
It is like already knowing Proper British English, and trying to get along in Mississippi:
you will need some time to acclimate yourself, but it isn't like you don't know how to even speak.
That is the point though, really: C# is all old ideas, as is Windows XP, and about 95% of basically any other piece of software that you will see in a corporate environment.
This is hardly true to only software, though: how many new ideas do you think goes into building a new highway overpass?
Usually not that much at all, and a fresh civil engineer should be able to understand most of it.
Becoming a good programmer cannot be taught at all, whether in a traditional university, or in a technical school; the only way to become a good programmer is to program a whole lot.
That is why a good computer science class will involve many programming assignments, even if they are pointless: the more time you spend programming ideas which you have never had to approach before, the better of a programmer you will become.
But a good programmer NEEDS a solid understanding of the theoretical aspects of computer science in order to do his job well.
He won't need the esoteric stuff most of the time, but every once and a while it will help immensely, because it allows him to understand why something isn't working the way he thinks it should.
You mention that people with computer science degrees often have trouble not producing beautiful code, and writing what you call "pragmatic" code.
If anything, that speaks volumes for the value of a university-level computer science degree, because we have all seen the results of "pragmatic" programmers.
That one sucks, it isn't worth the paper it is written on.
Why?
Article 29 section 3 of it reads:
"These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations."
which basically says the UN can violate them at will.
It is also full of a lot of non-rights such as
"Everyone has the right to... protection against unemployment." (23.1) which are basically along the lines of "and everybody gets a free pony!"
These rights are better for governments to follow, applied to everyone.
I am pretty sure that Microsoft Office will import WordPerfect documents, and WordStar documents too (which I actually have a lot of around somewhere).
I think we will be able to open up Microsoft Word documents for decades to come, just because of the sheer number of them, even if Microsoft were to collapse tomorrow, just like we can still access our old WordPerfect documents from 10 years ago and WordStar documents from 20 years ago.
What is more the problem is other, less used formats.
For example, I have a lot of documents for PC-Outline, a piece of outlining software that was bundled with WordStar 6.0.
The problem is, as far as I can tell nobody even makes outlining software anymore, much less converters from 20-year-old programs for it.
I am sure there are other examples like this, where specialized formats just disappear completely.
Does anybody know what happened to PC-Outline anyway? And are there actually any outlining programs still out there?
If Bush is the only reason that well-educated people working at places like Google, benefiting the "elite" with Internet access (a group probably almost as large as the "elite" with televisions), are not forced to "redistribute" their hard-earned paychecks to the unemployed, then I hope he stays in office until I die.
I don't know where they have free garbage collection, it has always been a municipal thing everywhere I have been, and the strikes were because their union decided they weren't making enough money.
Garbagemen aren't volunteers.
The point is, people are donating their skilled labor, and often not for the reasons you would think, which is apparently to "gain userbase".
I have never used this particular program, and don't know anybody who is working on it, but I bet that they have different motives than that.
This is not a business: viewing it that way isn't very enlightening.
Slashdot Mirror
Please, please, use more paragraph breaks!
Imagine a very tall man named Tim. Now imagine that he personally decides to nickname himself "Tiny Tim." That is humor, even if it might not be overly effective humor.
Now imagine that he introduces himself to some guy, lets call him Bob. "Hi Bob, nice to meet you, I'm Tiny Tim." Then Bob replies, "Since when is someone more than six feet tall tiny! Ha, ha, ha!" This is not humor.
In your last post, you were a Bob. Your post would have been acceptable if it referenced a ukulele.
He claims that he has discovered a new humor technology which is a combination of irony technology and sarcasm technology, so-called "sarcastic irony;" unfortunately, this new form of humor may disprove the theories of quantum mechanics, so I think it is all a cheap trick to get VC (venture comedian) money.
Yes, there is a set of beliefs that comprise normative Christianity, and that is most definitely not it. I am assuming that this is an actual sect that you are a member of, and not something you are just making up. What is your group's name? I have honestly never heard anything even close to that.
Just for the benefit of any non-Christian out there who is reading this and honestly wondering: this is not even remotely close to any standard Christian belief.
Here is the way I see it personally. I don't view sperm or eggs as human. I don't view something of a few thousand cells as human. I do view a newborn infant human, and I do view a 4-month old (what is the youngest surviving premature birth anyway? I don't know) as a human, whether it is in the womb or out of it.
Whenever the thing stops being a "thing" and starts being a human is when it stops being a medical procedure and starts being infanticide. I don't know where the line is, but I think it is quite early in the pregnancy, around a month or less. I view it as better to unnecessarily infringe upon a medical procedure than it is to unnecessarily allow for the alternative. It is better to err on the side of caution.
Is it acceptable to kill a 2-week old baby outside of the womb? I was born almost a month overdue, so would it have been acceptable to kill me at what would have been 2-weeks old normally? Just because I was still inside my mother's womb?
What about a prematurely-born child of 6-months? Is killing it okay? If not, then what about a 6-month old that is still in the womb? Why is there a distinction?
When a person is born is actually a very arbitrary point of time. When a person is conceived is not.
And instead of debating these sort of things rationally, people who support certain viewpoints just throw insults, because they know they can't win with the facts.
This is a lot of the reason why "science" in general is looked down upon. Instead of actual scientific processes, which focus upon rational conclusions, most of their exposure is to so-called "scientists" who are after nothing more besides a political, social, or religious agenda using the title of "Science" as a method to avoid debate.
"You can't disagree with me! Science says so! I just asked it yesterday!
Speaking of poetry, one of my favorite poets, Walt Whitman, was very guilty of changing his work. His primary work, Leaves of Grass, went through more editions than I know about. I have a book with the original 1855 version, but most people haven't seen it. At the time it was seen as a novel practice, but now looking back I wonder if it was a mistake. Instead of rewriting the same poems and adding a few new to the same volume, perhaps he should have instead have just written the new ones, in new volumes? And left Leaves of Grass as it was in 1855? Or perhaps not. It allows for a good insight to the changes in his thought, since I can compare them.
Vim rocks:
Control-P
It's like the IDDQD for typing.
This "war-mongering theocracy," which permits the practice or non-practice of any religion, just established a giant nominally Muslim democracy, possibly against our own interests. Are you free to practice (or not practice) any religion in your country? When was the last time your country replaced a dictator in another nation with a democratic government?
Most Americans are Christians of some form, myself included, and a small but vocal minority of so-called Christians do push their own agendas, but most of us ignore them; I don't believe that the Republicans serve them, although the Republicans do tolerate them.
I don't know what country you are in, but if their intellectual idols are Castro, the French, and Chavez, then it has some serious problems. And no, it doesn't really matter: at least not to us.
I think the article's author is pretty new to computers. Wow! I can boot any computer from something I carry around! I think I know what USB flash drives are. I generally prefer this, or at worst this.
No, they should be for the recording industry, because they are the Recording Industry Association of America; and they seem to be doing everything in their power to protect their member's interests. If it disagrees with the interests of the musicians, then so be it, as far as they are concerned. Presumably there is some "Musician's Association of America", but they have apparently been doing a horrible job for decades.
* (|Great news?| 'this)
T
; That's right, that is a space in a variable name.
; Just be glad I didn't put in a newline (cause I can).
; suckOnThat, camelCaseRetards.
Here is a simple example. ... ... ...)
,conditional))
... ... ...
,conditional)
... ... ...)
There is no "while" loop in Common Lisp, but I think it sometimes makes the code clearer. With it, I can write
(while (> x 10)
stuff
stuff
stuff
;;; A WHILE macro, operating in a matter similar to the while loop in C.
(defmacro while (conditional &rest body)
`(do ()
((not
,@body))
Along the same lines, I defined an "until", which is of course achievable in C by
while (!whatever())
{
stuff
stuff
stuff
}
but I view it as more clear as well.
;;; An UNTIL macro.
(defmacro until (conditional &rest body)
`(while (not
,@body))
Now I can write
(until (x <= 10)
stuff
stuff
stuff
If that makes my intentions clearer.
This has the exact same results as above, but the difference can mean a lot to me when I try to understand the code later on.
I am reasonably certain that these are impossible in Python, especially in any way that would add clarity, which is the whole point.
I am absolutely certain that it is literally impossible in C, C++, Java, Fortran, Cobol, Perl, and basically anything else.
Common Lisp macros allow you to code what you mean, not just something which happens to be functionally equivalent.
Earth: DungBeetle (the intercaps makes it corporate-friendly!)
I have had troubles because my resume is in Latex. Apparently there are some people in HR departments out there who can't even figure out what to do with a PDF.
You are right, one cannot learn C# in an afternoon: it took me about two weeks. Of course, I had been programming in C for about 8 years before then, and both C++ and Python for about 4 years, so it was easy. C# is very much just a more "C++"-ish Python or Java, so it didn't exactly take very long to learn the new syntax for the old ideas. It is like already knowing Proper British English, and trying to get along in Mississippi: you will need some time to acclimate yourself, but it isn't like you don't know how to even speak.
That is the point though, really: C# is all old ideas, as is Windows XP, and about 95% of basically any other piece of software that you will see in a corporate environment. This is hardly true to only software, though: how many new ideas do you think goes into building a new highway overpass? Usually not that much at all, and a fresh civil engineer should be able to understand most of it.
Becoming a good programmer cannot be taught at all, whether in a traditional university, or in a technical school; the only way to become a good programmer is to program a whole lot. That is why a good computer science class will involve many programming assignments, even if they are pointless: the more time you spend programming ideas which you have never had to approach before, the better of a programmer you will become.
But a good programmer NEEDS a solid understanding of the theoretical aspects of computer science in order to do his job well. He won't need the esoteric stuff most of the time, but every once and a while it will help immensely, because it allows him to understand why something isn't working the way he thinks it should.
You mention that people with computer science degrees often have trouble not producing beautiful code, and writing what you call "pragmatic" code. If anything, that speaks volumes for the value of a university-level computer science degree, because we have all seen the results of "pragmatic" programmers.
That one sucks, it isn't worth the paper it is written on. Why? Article 29 section 3 of it reads: "These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations." which basically says the UN can violate them at will. It is also full of a lot of non-rights such as "Everyone has the right to ... protection against unemployment." (23.1) which are basically along the lines of "and everybody gets a free pony!"
These rights are better for governments to follow, applied to everyone.
I am pretty sure that Microsoft Office will import WordPerfect documents, and WordStar documents too (which I actually have a lot of around somewhere). I think we will be able to open up Microsoft Word documents for decades to come, just because of the sheer number of them, even if Microsoft were to collapse tomorrow, just like we can still access our old WordPerfect documents from 10 years ago and WordStar documents from 20 years ago.
What is more the problem is other, less used formats. For example, I have a lot of documents for PC-Outline, a piece of outlining software that was bundled with WordStar 6.0. The problem is, as far as I can tell nobody even makes outlining software anymore, much less converters from 20-year-old programs for it. I am sure there are other examples like this, where specialized formats just disappear completely. Does anybody know what happened to PC-Outline anyway? And are there actually any outlining programs still out there?
That's good to hear. For a minute there I thought that Texas A&M had just won for good.
If Bush is the only reason that well-educated people working at places like Google, benefiting the "elite" with Internet access (a group probably almost as large as the "elite" with televisions), are not forced to "redistribute" their hard-earned paychecks to the unemployed, then I hope he stays in office until I die.
Damned communists.
Here is a picture of an 1864 2-cent piece (for auction on eBay) with the phrase "In God We Trust" clearly visible.
But I thought that liberals were supposed to embrace alternative lifestyle choices!
Gothmolly: have sex with your wife.
tepples: Not everybody can afford to take care of yet another child.
You could always stop being Catholic.
I don't know where they have free garbage collection, it has always been a municipal thing everywhere I have been, and the strikes were because their union decided they weren't making enough money. Garbagemen aren't volunteers.
The point is, people are donating their skilled labor, and often not for the reasons you would think, which is apparently to "gain userbase". I have never used this particular program, and don't know anybody who is working on it, but I bet that they have different motives than that.
This is not a business: viewing it that way isn't very enlightening.