Why does every language of the month need to come with at least one blatantly stupid, avoidable idiocy guaranteed to trigger a large proportion of its intended audience?
Because having neckbearded snowflakes whining about their tender technical opinions doesn't actually help the language designers with any part of what they're doing. It doesn't solve technical problems, it doesn't encourage adoption, it doesn't even produce useful criticisms. If you make sure to include some aesthetics from different camps and mix them together in an innocuous way, you can make nearly everybody go "ewwww" a little bit, and then the ones who freak out will escort themselves out the door. It is the only known way of even getting rid of them.
It is a lot more like Perl; it runs fast, and you can write it fast too. But reading it is going to take time.
That tradeoff isn't going to go away, it is baked into the range of problems we want to solve with the same tool. The less verbose the language is, the more of the complexity is hidden. That makes it expert-friendly, but it also makes collaboration more difficult.
I prefer the Ruby solution; it can't do everything. Lots of stuff that is hard you would write in C instead. And it has an excellent C interface.
That's great for typical problems, but it doesn't really provide for distributed problems. That's what Julia is for. So it is competing with Go for non-statistical uses, not Python.
But it is mostly competing with matlab and R for those statistical uses. Also, notice they mention LISP instead of Haskell? They're not actually as ambitious as they claim to be.
They're just language designers, why should they be expected to have narrowly parsed understanding of the words they use?! LOL
Java would be an example of a language with restrictive IP conditions that is limiting its adoption. You can still do smart phone apps, and internal tools you're not distributing outside the company.
Try "fuzzing code" instead. Or if you weren't sure and you said it like "Fuzzing (programming)" or "fuzzing computers" it would also work. Never say "microcode." Just know that microcode is a type of code, and use the word "code" until and unless you understand the difference and have a good reason to say microcode. If differentiates between things that only need to be differentiated if you have an additional use case related to the technology.
If you can't find the hundred dollar bills in New Holland, it is because you're waltzing Matilda.
And if you really want to know where they go, save up for one, and when you finally make it to a town, spend it all in one place. You'll surely figure it out by then.
Right, right, he was saying he didn't comprehend the difference between a coast that is on the east side of a land mass, and an east coast in the context of continental climates.
I know having the same word being used in two different contexts is too complicated for a lot of you, but don't think I'm going to dumb down my comments or stop making a serious point. If you want a kindergarten-level explanation for everything I say, you'll simply be wanting.
IBM sells cloud computing services, including hosting for hyperchain, the leading non-coin-related blockchain offering. The open source one that IBM released a couple years ago.
Don't forget to include an idea with your words next time. You think I'm wrong about something, but you don't know what. You're sure it is something 3rd grade level, but it wasn't one of the things you actually understand. It was more like geometry.
Oh, I get it, you didn't know the Earth spins! LOLOLOL
You're like an inverse Turing test; there would be no way to distinguish you from a 1970s AI program.
There can literally be any amount of overhead. They have a CEO, who may have a salary, and they might even have other employees.
It is true that the direct labor costs are low, and other costs of producing the product are low, but wages that go to providing the service aren't counted as "overhead." But administrative salaries are.
If they had enough revenue to account for overhead, they wouldn't be refunding people they'd just stop signing up new customers.
Oh, and are you calling Xenophon a liar about Socrates getting paid for his teaching?
You have it exactly backwards. Xenophon stated clearly that Socrates did not accept payment, was not a professional teacher. (In fact he was some sort of stone mason or sculptor) Go now, re-read Xenophon and be free of one of your many idiocies!
Least of all did he tend to make his companions greedy of money. He would not, while restraining passion generally, make capital out of the one passion which attached others to himself; and by this abstinence, he believed, he was best consulting his own freedom; in so much that he stigmatised those who condescended to take wages for their society as vendors of their own persons, because they were compelled to discuss for the benefits of their paymasters. What surprised him was that any one possessing virtue should deign to ask money as its price instead of simply finding his reward in the acquisition of an honest friend, as if the new-fledged soul of honour could forget her debt of gratitude to her greatest benefactor.
For himself, without making any such profession, he was content to believe that those who accepted his views would play their parts as good and true friends to himself and one another their lives long. Once more then: how should a man of this character corrupt the young? unless the careful cultivation of virtue be corruption.
You're starting to think about it for the first time, good job.
But actually, historically lots of white racists like to find a black person who is also racist against black people, and use that as if it means something. It means nothing, though. That's the team you accidentally find yourself joining when you "go there."
Slashdot Mirror
I'm sure they can handle the unicorn and the buckets of gold, but if you want leprechaun support you're going to need a Haskell interface.
Why does every language of the month need to come with at least one blatantly stupid, avoidable idiocy guaranteed to trigger a large proportion of its intended audience?
Because having neckbearded snowflakes whining about their tender technical opinions doesn't actually help the language designers with any part of what they're doing. It doesn't solve technical problems, it doesn't encourage adoption, it doesn't even produce useful criticisms. If you make sure to include some aesthetics from different camps and mix them together in an innocuous way, you can make nearly everybody go "ewwww" a little bit, and then the ones who freak out will escort themselves out the door. It is the only known way of even getting rid of them.
It is a lot more like Perl; it runs fast, and you can write it fast too. But reading it is going to take time.
That tradeoff isn't going to go away, it is baked into the range of problems we want to solve with the same tool. The less verbose the language is, the more of the complexity is hidden. That makes it expert-friendly, but it also makes collaboration more difficult.
I prefer the Ruby solution; it can't do everything. Lots of stuff that is hard you would write in C instead. And it has an excellent C interface.
That's great for typical problems, but it doesn't really provide for distributed problems. That's what Julia is for. So it is competing with Go for non-statistical uses, not Python.
But it is mostly competing with matlab and R for those statistical uses. Also, notice they mention LISP instead of Haskell? They're not actually as ambitious as they claim to be.
It is called your imagination, and you're already using it!
They're just language designers, why should they be expected to have narrowly parsed understanding of the words they use?! LOL
Java would be an example of a language with restrictive IP conditions that is limiting its adoption. You can still do smart phone apps, and internal tools you're not distributing outside the company.
Try "fuzzing code" instead. Or if you weren't sure and you said it like "Fuzzing (programming)" or "fuzzing computers" it would also work. Never say "microcode." Just know that microcode is a type of code, and use the word "code" until and unless you understand the difference and have a good reason to say microcode. If differentiates between things that only need to be differentiated if you have an additional use case related to the technology.
Not only can the cat and bag each be held wrong, even the idea can be held wrong!
How does an AI algorithm differ from a plain old algorithm. I am so curious...
The use case.
Right, I remember 20 years ago when IBM was begging their professional services clients running AIX to please please please migrate to linux.
But the fact is, without IBM releasing open source, I'd have spent at least another 10 years wrangling sendmail.
Not everything they wrote was great, which is why they don't still use all of it.
I grew up with cats, and if you can't get the cat back in the bag it is usually because you're holding it wrong.
If you can't find the hundred dollar bills in New Holland, it is because you're waltzing Matilda.
And if you really want to know where they go, save up for one, and when you finally make it to a town, spend it all in one place. You'll surely figure it out by then.
And if it still doesn't make sense, buy a Bible.
It doesn't have to provide availability.
And it definitely is a data store, but it has exactly zero data retrieval features. So calling it a database might be vastly overstating the features.
Which is probably a good thing for the actual use cases that benefit from it.
Also keep in mind, the IBM blockchain stuff has nothing to do with cybercurrencies, it is only about smart contracts.
That's not even about blockchain, that's about voting software.
Losing a bye happens in chess all the time. But you still get the point.
Right, right, he was saying he didn't comprehend the difference between a coast that is on the east side of a land mass, and an east coast in the context of continental climates.
I know having the same word being used in two different contexts is too complicated for a lot of you, but don't think I'm going to dumb down my comments or stop making a serious point. If you want a kindergarten-level explanation for everything I say, you'll simply be wanting.
IBM sells cloud computing services, including hosting for hyperchain, the leading non-coin-related blockchain offering. The open source one that IBM released a couple years ago.
The problem with introducing species is that they don't usually balance the same way they did in their native environments.
Oh, they reach the same balance, make no mistake.
Check back in 8 or 10 million years and see!
Don't forget to include an idea with your words next time. You think I'm wrong about something, but you don't know what. You're sure it is something 3rd grade level, but it wasn't one of the things you actually understand. It was more like geometry.
Oh, I get it, you didn't know the Earth spins! LOLOLOL
You're like an inverse Turing test; there would be no way to distinguish you from a 1970s AI program.
Your island is too small to have an east coast, everything is still within the ocean-moderated climate.
These ticks seem to be much worse in a continental east coast environment.
New Zealand is totally different, with rain evenly distributed around the year. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The whole country is Oceanic.
That reminds me!
I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords!!!
I hope this is true, because without deepfakes how are slashdot users going to use dating sites?!
Think of the innocent neckbeards, people, think of the neckbeards.
Did you just want to advertise that you're bigoted against disabled people, or did you have some other point?
You didn't comprehend the meaning of the words in that combination, so maybe just stop there?
There can’t be that much overhead involved.
There can literally be any amount of overhead. They have a CEO, who may have a salary, and they might even have other employees.
It is true that the direct labor costs are low, and other costs of producing the product are low, but wages that go to providing the service aren't counted as "overhead." But administrative salaries are.
If they had enough revenue to account for overhead, they wouldn't be refunding people they'd just stop signing up new customers.
You have it exactly backwards. Xenophon stated clearly that Socrates did not accept payment, was not a professional teacher. (In fact he was some sort of stone mason or sculptor) Go now, re-read Xenophon and be free of one of your many idiocies!
Least of all did he tend to make his companions greedy of money. He would not, while restraining passion generally, make capital out of the one passion which attached others to himself; and by this abstinence, he believed, he was best consulting his own freedom; in so much that he stigmatised those who condescended to take wages for their society as vendors of their own persons, because they were compelled to discuss for the benefits of their paymasters. What surprised him was that any one possessing virtue should deign to ask money as its price instead of simply finding his reward in the acquisition of an honest friend, as if the new-fledged soul of honour could forget her debt of gratitude to her greatest benefactor.
For himself, without making any such profession, he was content to believe that those who accepted his views would play their parts as good and true friends to himself and one another their lives long. Once more then: how should a man of this character corrupt the young? unless the careful cultivation of virtue be corruption.
http://www.gutenberg.org/files...
You're starting to think about it for the first time, good job.
But actually, historically lots of white racists like to find a black person who is also racist against black people, and use that as if it means something. It means nothing, though. That's the team you accidentally find yourself joining when you "go there."