There is no faster way to get your initiative funded than to utter the word "Compliance." Well done, IT team, you got your pet robots.
Or they thought they did, until they realized that management just uttered the word "robot" next to the new software tool that was added to the deliverables for the quarter and provisioned to use existing resources.
A couple years ago I was up in the mountains foraging for mushrooms with some friends... dozens of miles outside of my coverage area... when suddenly somebody's phone rang! Turns out he had [some brand with lots of coverage].
Of course, it also turns out that since he was way up in the mountains it did no good at all for him to answer the phone because he couldn't make it to the office that day, and if the phone call had just gone to voice mail he wouldn't have had to ask them to call back and leave the info on his voice mail...
If you do that math and actually add 3 to the current year, you might discover that they're promising to use the standard once it is agreed and that there is nothing odd or missing from their claim.
She did write a Philosophy book, but it was called "Philosophy: Who Needs It?"
Why is it that these types of Randhead morons don't even read her books? She tears into them pretty hard in Who Needs It, for being moronic followers instead of real Objectivists. As she also points out, real Objectivists are likely to disagree with her often because she isn't an expert in very many fields and they should be trying to advance their understanding not just find something to repeat.
Linux servers don't use "anti-virus" to protect themselves, when there is an exploit the system is to patch the exploit and upgrade, not to hide behind middleware.
The reason that anti-virus software runs on linux is for scanning uploads that might contain windows viruses!
It isn't bullet proof, but it does have both belt and suspenders.
The one linux virus I got was in the 90s... off a floppy disk. It added a security warning to the output of/usr/bin/ls
If you reinstalled windows 3 times in 2 years that tells me 2 things about you:
1) You normally actually run windows, not mac, presumably for reasons. And you'd rather use mac, so obviously the mac can't meet your real needs.
2) You're no good at managing windows, and have collected a bunch of nonsense myths about how hard it is that lead you to do nonsense like reinstalling. If you didn't know anything about windows, you wouldn't be reinstalling, and you'd be better off as a user. There is no way to correct for internalized myths, though.
What I've noticed from users is that a windows user will blame the computer every time even if it is their own mistake, and an apple user will blame themselves every time even if the hardware failed.
Apple users know they have the Fancy Name Brand that Cool People(TM) use, so they have multiple levels of psychological aversion to blaming it for anything. They would be less cool by extension. And the brand image doesn't place any value on being capable of using "regular" technology, so they take no hit to their hipster image by blaming themselves.
It is really the same as any other name brand item. If a person buys name brand jeans and they tear, they're going to blame themselves for not taking better care of something expensive. Another person who buys a different brand gets mad that it didn't last longer because they only tried to use it in the "normal" way.
If they blame it for anything, even its own real failings, then they lose the snob value.
In the cliche you're parroting they include the world "nobody" in order to make the thought experiment work. In your parroting you use an individual instead of an absolute, so it can be instantly discarded.
Nobody ever says, "If two people were in the forest and one of them was deaf, and a tree fell, would it make a sound?"
Right, I'm not a True Scotsman. That said, you can't stop me from being a software developer that way.
You can stop yourself from having a clue though, it is just as easy as you make it look.
Understanding what things are called has nothing at all to do with your opinions about what things should be called, or what is a True Scotsman and what isn't, or if vtables had anything at all to do with object oriented programming. You apparently are ignorant of the basic theory involved. I wouldn't want you to strain yourself by actually reading Ivar Jacobson's book, or any of the others, but I'll give you a spoiler: it isn't about language features, it is about engineering practices.
People will publish on the internet news about which manufacturers are unfriendly to software freedom, and it will be easy to select hardware that meets my needs.
The trend is the other direction. These days I can even program a Texas Instruments microcontroller using emacs and gcc and a cli flash tool. Hardware isn't getting locked down, it is getting thrown wide open!
The Universe doesn't work that way. People call it Object Oriented. You can think that they're wrong to do so, but it will still be true that people call it Object Oriented.
People also call a near hit a near miss. There is no way to stop that from having happened. And worse, there is no way to stop them from saying it again.
People who disagree with you and think you're wrong about what it should be called are going to keep calling it what they called it before. Saying it isn't true is just insisting that you're ignorant, that you don't know it is called that by some people.
If a word can mean two things, it means both those things. Here, what you misunderstand is the "object" in the original concept of object-oriented programming. The object is the abstract "object" that you're modeling in the software! The point is that you orient your code so that it has the same shape as the thing you're modeling. Language features for that are useful, but they're not the actual point of it.
It always seems to me that to make my code work I have to think about them as being totally separate steps and ignore the fact that gcc does everything. That way, it is all very simple; the preprocessor does its thing, and then the compiler compiles. It saves having to memorize a bunch of archaic rules for how header files and macros work.
I don't want to know very much about how it works, it is too easy to accidentally do something clever in C.
What do you have against shoehorns, anyways? It is really hard to find a good shoehorn these days. When I was a lad I could buy a nice brass one at a yard sale for a dollar. Now they want over $20, and they only have plastic.
People don't remember the old days, "I bought a new hard drive, but my BIOS is old so I had to format it as two drives. Now I can't find anything and I'm always out of space even though I still have space.:(" Sorry grandpa, you have to buy a new computer every year because digital shoehorns are proprietary.
I remember those days, I don't care if UEFI is imperfect. Can I still choose my OS? Yes? Is it standardized? Yes? Sold!
Slashdot Mirror
ED209
Just another cheap knockoff of the CrimeBuster(TM).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
There is no faster way to get your initiative funded than to utter the word "Compliance." Well done, IT team, you got your pet robots.
Or they thought they did, until they realized that management just uttered the word "robot" next to the new software tool that was added to the deliverables for the quarter and provisioned to use existing resources.
While Chin called them robots, it was not clear if they had a physical presence or how exactly employees interacted with them.
Can we agree to call them 'Bank-Bots'?
How about we agree to wait and find out what they are before we debate what to call them?
A couple years ago I was up in the mountains foraging for mushrooms with some friends... dozens of miles outside of my coverage area... when suddenly somebody's phone rang! Turns out he had [some brand with lots of coverage].
Of course, it also turns out that since he was way up in the mountains it did no good at all for him to answer the phone because he couldn't make it to the office that day, and if the phone call had just gone to voice mail he wouldn't have had to ask them to call back and leave the info on his voice mail...
my wifi has 11g. Count `em: eleven gees! Gee, WIz!
If I get any more Gs I'm gonna need shoulder pads.
If you do that math and actually add 3 to the current year, you might discover that they're promising to use the standard once it is agreed and that there is nothing odd or missing from their claim.
Golly, if only the speed of light could also be made to be supersonic at the same time!
Oh, wait...
Nope, it is merely an observed average.
Atlas Shrugged was fiction.
She did write a Philosophy book, but it was called "Philosophy: Who Needs It?"
Why is it that these types of Randhead morons don't even read her books? She tears into them pretty hard in Who Needs It, for being moronic followers instead of real Objectivists. As she also points out, real Objectivists are likely to disagree with her often because she isn't an expert in very many fields and they should be trying to advance their understanding not just find something to repeat.
Truly a sad day for humanity. What an incredible lost opportunity.
My wife has an LG and the case has a cutout for the NFC sensor but no cutout for the back logo.
I don't bother with a case myself, but I tend to cover or erase excessively prominent brand logos.
Linux servers don't use "anti-virus" to protect themselves, when there is an exploit the system is to patch the exploit and upgrade, not to hide behind middleware.
The reason that anti-virus software runs on linux is for scanning uploads that might contain windows viruses!
It isn't bullet proof, but it does have both belt and suspenders.
The one linux virus I got was in the 90s... off a floppy disk. It added a security warning to the output of /usr/bin/ls
If you reinstalled windows 3 times in 2 years that tells me 2 things about you:
1) You normally actually run windows, not mac, presumably for reasons. And you'd rather use mac, so obviously the mac can't meet your real needs.
2) You're no good at managing windows, and have collected a bunch of nonsense myths about how hard it is that lead you to do nonsense like reinstalling. If you didn't know anything about windows, you wouldn't be reinstalling, and you'd be better off as a user. There is no way to correct for internalized myths, though.
What I've noticed from users is that a windows user will blame the computer every time even if it is their own mistake, and an apple user will blame themselves every time even if the hardware failed.
Apple users know they have the Fancy Name Brand that Cool People(TM) use, so they have multiple levels of psychological aversion to blaming it for anything. They would be less cool by extension. And the brand image doesn't place any value on being capable of using "regular" technology, so they take no hit to their hipster image by blaming themselves.
It is really the same as any other name brand item. If a person buys name brand jeans and they tear, they're going to blame themselves for not taking better care of something expensive. Another person who buys a different brand gets mad that it didn't last longer because they only tried to use it in the "normal" way.
If they blame it for anything, even its own real failings, then they lose the snob value.
I dunno, but I have a wireless Microsoft keyboard and it Just Works under linux using generic auto-detected drivers.
Then again, all that 3rd party Surface stuff works well under linux, too.
Yes, because somebody else is using it.
In the cliche you're parroting they include the world "nobody" in order to make the thought experiment work. In your parroting you use an individual instead of an absolute, so it can be instantly discarded.
Nobody ever says, "If two people were in the forest and one of them was deaf, and a tree fell, would it make a sound?"
Right, I'm not a True Scotsman. That said, you can't stop me from being a software developer that way.
You can stop yourself from having a clue though, it is just as easy as you make it look.
Understanding what things are called has nothing at all to do with your opinions about what things should be called, or what is a True Scotsman and what isn't, or if vtables had anything at all to do with object oriented programming. You apparently are ignorant of the basic theory involved. I wouldn't want you to strain yourself by actually reading Ivar Jacobson's book, or any of the others, but I'll give you a spoiler: it isn't about language features, it is about engineering practices.
I guess it is true, the internet knows everything.
But wow, you consume like 87 hours of media a week. That's insane. You should get out more.
This is why you have to control the pixels on the screens you look at. Otherwise you're just going to end up recycled like that guy.
Adblockers will save your life.
Nope. I won't care at all.
People will publish on the internet news about which manufacturers are unfriendly to software freedom, and it will be easy to select hardware that meets my needs.
The trend is the other direction. These days I can even program a Texas Instruments microcontroller using emacs and gcc and a cli flash tool. Hardware isn't getting locked down, it is getting thrown wide open!
The Universe doesn't work that way. People call it Object Oriented. You can think that they're wrong to do so, but it will still be true that people call it Object Oriented.
People also call a near hit a near miss. There is no way to stop that from having happened. And worse, there is no way to stop them from saying it again.
People who disagree with you and think you're wrong about what it should be called are going to keep calling it what they called it before. Saying it isn't true is just insisting that you're ignorant, that you don't know it is called that by some people.
If a word can mean two things, it means both those things. Here, what you misunderstand is the "object" in the original concept of object-oriented programming. The object is the abstract "object" that you're modeling in the software! The point is that you orient your code so that it has the same shape as the thing you're modeling. Language features for that are useful, but they're not the actual point of it.
It always seems to me that to make my code work I have to think about them as being totally separate steps and ignore the fact that gcc does everything. That way, it is all very simple; the preprocessor does its thing, and then the compiler compiles. It saves having to memorize a bunch of archaic rules for how header files and macros work.
I don't want to know very much about how it works, it is too easy to accidentally do something clever in C.
What do you have against shoehorns, anyways? It is really hard to find a good shoehorn these days. When I was a lad I could buy a nice brass one at a yard sale for a dollar. Now they want over $20, and they only have plastic.
People don't remember the old days, "I bought a new hard drive, but my BIOS is old so I had to format it as two drives. Now I can't find anything and I'm always out of space even though I still have space. :(" Sorry grandpa, you have to buy a new computer every year because digital shoehorns are proprietary.
I remember those days, I don't care if UEFI is imperfect. Can I still choose my OS? Yes? Is it standardized? Yes? Sold!
Progress might look different if you had software freedom.
I tried BSD again for a workstation about a decade ago and it was serviceable but a PITA.
If you have a reason to switch, just do it. Software worth running runs everywhere.