I don't think dumbing things down, or communication is the problem, it is the politicizing of everything. I don't care if the moon IS going to crash in my driveway, killing my entire family, if the news comes from the mouth of a politician, then I'm damn well staying where I am out of spite if for no other reason.
Personally, I think it is moronic to hate the right or the left, unless you are going to hate them both. In all relevant ways, they are essentially the same thing, and not understanding that just shows one isn't paying attention.
There was plenty of religious persecution in the early years of the U.S., so I'm not sure where you get the notion that culturally there was a mutual respect amongst highly diverse theologies. Absolutely, there were some people who were tolerant of other people's beliefs, but there were many who weren't; just like today.
Having read the article, the only thing mentioned regarding Christianity was that Texas wanted to teach that the U.S. was founded on Christian ideals, with liberty via, amongst other things, a free market being one of the goals, which it was. So, from the article, I'm afraid I'm not seeing the bald-faced lies you're speaking of.
The political structure of the U.S. was base in part on the political structure found in Deuteronomy. Some of the founders of the U.S. wanted it based even more on the structure found in Deuteronomy, but things were not ratified that way.
Wouldn't utilizing something like Wikipedia result is the same thing; a curriculum based on popular vote? Isn't that what people are complaining about here? Texas wants to teach things California and others don't agree with, so everybody is whining and whinging about Texas when California is basically doing the same thing; albeit in a reactionary way?
In my opinion, the only fair way to write textbooks is to remove all the politicking and attempts at indoctrination from the process, which is probably nigh unto impossible.
I can see why some people nowadays would take offense at a school teaching the notion that the U.S. is a nation "chosen by God," but that is indeed what many in the early history of our country believed, and is probably the reason our money has "In God We Trust" written on it. If you do your homework, our system of government has indeed borrowed from the Bible, and many of those who started this country had very strong Christian beliefs, so to say the history of our country has nothing to do with God and Christianity would be incorrect. Therefore, it seems to me, removing all references to God and Christianity from our history books would be in direct conflict to the view you have presented, yet you seem to hold it anyway.
I guess what I'm supposed to take away from your post is that it's OK to vote on and alter facts as long as the resultant "fact" is something you agree with.
I don't think it needs to provide a speed increase. I like it for the comfort and have used it for 15 years for that reason alone.
Although many people claim they do realize a speed increase, I didn't. So, I was simply hypothesizing that the reason I didn't notice a speed increase is that I can type as fast as I can think with either layout. If I wasn't putting sentences together in my head and then typing them, but rather typing pre-authored content verbatim, I'm sure I could type much faster than I do.
I know both QWERTY and Dvorak as well and I have to agree with you on your point of less fatigue. Your fingers don't move nearly as much as they do on a QWERTY keyboard.
However, I haven't noticed any increase in speed with Dvorak. Perhaps I might if I was a secretary and typing pre-authored material into a word processor, but I don't do that kind of work and I find I type as fast as I speak to myself in my head on both layouts.
I have heard some good things about Colemak, so maybe I'll learn that next and see if it beats Dvorak in the comfort area.
I don't clearly understand the author's point of view either. Besides, everybody knows that Django is a Model-Template-View pattern and not a Model-View-Controller pattern anyway.
Patterns shmatterns. Django is awesome either way.
I don't know if I believe this. We've had blind passengers riding around with people for a very long time and I don't recall anybody complaining that talking to blind people while driving a car increases one's risk of an accident.
I think our brains function differently when talking on the phone. They make us dumber. And my hypothesis can be readily observed in any public place where people are chatting on cell phones.
Personally, I use Scrum and a text document. I don't like apps like MS Project very much because I feel they do a poor job of realistically planning and tracking a complex project.
I agree. While I did go to college for a while, I never finished because I started getting the kinds of jobs I was going to college for.
Without a degree, I have worked for Microsoft, Intel, Novell, and several other companies; all with a good salary.
I have had one interview with a guy who, once he realized I didn't have a degree, threw a girly tantrum about the importance of college, but most companies just want to know that you can do the work and are more than willing to accept real-world experience in place of a degree.
Thank you for the information. I was talking about libraries, not PostgreSQL itself though.
However, since you mentioned it, 9 steps is a pretty big pain in the butt when you can do everything you just said in two steps on Debian: 1) apt-get install postgresql 2) create a postgres user
As fun as./configure && make && make install are, I want to dink around as little as possible with installations.:)
I had problems with Psycopg2 and one other Python/PostgreSQL library not building in Leopard due to its 64-bit-ness.
Installing Python, PostgreSQL, and Django is easy, but the necessary libraries between Python and PostgreSQL were not (perhaps it has been fixed by now).
No, Macports does not work right for Python and PostgreSQL. For one thing, a couple of the libraries needed to do Python/Django programming don't compile correctly. For another thing, a lot of the libraries that are available for Python 2.4 in Macports are missing for Python 2.5+.
Macports is a good tool when it works, but it doesn't always.
I really like developing on my Apple machine for the most part, but it has a few issues that make it less appealing to me than Linux.
Currently, most of the development I'm doing is using Django and PostgreSQL. Installing PostgreSQL and the required Python libraries on OS X is tremendously painful. It was painful on Tiger and Leopard has made it more so. Macports tries to make it easier, but it could use a lot of work/testing/more work.
Installing the same tools on Linux is so easy, a Windows user could do it.
He or she is saying that people who don't succeed will find any loophole that enables them to blame their inability to succeed on others. He or she is absolutely correct.
I second this. I think Wingware is the best Python IDE available. It is a bit costly though. I also like PyDev-extensions for Eclipse, but not anywhere near as much.
In spite of all that, I mostly use TextEdit for all my editing needs.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think dumbing things down, or communication is the problem, it is the politicizing of everything. I don't care if the moon IS going to crash in my driveway, killing my entire family, if the news comes from the mouth of a politician, then I'm damn well staying where I am out of spite if for no other reason.
That's the saddest thing I've ever heard. No, really it is. I'm sorry if that came across as sarcastic.
Personally, I think it is moronic to hate the right or the left, unless you are going to hate them both. In all relevant ways, they are essentially the same thing, and not understanding that just shows one isn't paying attention.
There was plenty of religious persecution in the early years of the U.S., so I'm not sure where you get the notion that culturally there was a mutual respect amongst highly diverse theologies. Absolutely, there were some people who were tolerant of other people's beliefs, but there were many who weren't; just like today.
Having read the article, the only thing mentioned regarding Christianity was that Texas wanted to teach that the U.S. was founded on Christian ideals, with liberty via, amongst other things, a free market being one of the goals, which it was. So, from the article, I'm afraid I'm not seeing the bald-faced lies you're speaking of.
The political structure of the U.S. was base in part on the political structure found in Deuteronomy. Some of the founders of the U.S. wanted it based even more on the structure found in Deuteronomy, but things were not ratified that way.
Wouldn't utilizing something like Wikipedia result is the same thing; a curriculum based on popular vote? Isn't that what people are complaining about here? Texas wants to teach things California and others don't agree with, so everybody is whining and whinging about Texas when California is basically doing the same thing; albeit in a reactionary way?
In my opinion, the only fair way to write textbooks is to remove all the politicking and attempts at indoctrination from the process, which is probably nigh unto impossible.
I can see why some people nowadays would take offense at a school teaching the notion that the U.S. is a nation "chosen by God," but that is indeed what many in the early history of our country believed, and is probably the reason our money has "In God We Trust" written on it. If you do your homework, our system of government has indeed borrowed from the Bible, and many of those who started this country had very strong Christian beliefs, so to say the history of our country has nothing to do with God and Christianity would be incorrect. Therefore, it seems to me, removing all references to God and Christianity from our history books would be in direct conflict to the view you have presented, yet you seem to hold it anyway.
I guess what I'm supposed to take away from your post is that it's OK to vote on and alter facts as long as the resultant "fact" is something you agree with.
I second that. Firebird is nice, but PostgreSQL is better.
I don't think it needs to provide a speed increase. I like it for the comfort and have used it for 15 years for that reason alone.
Although many people claim they do realize a speed increase, I didn't. So, I was simply hypothesizing that the reason I didn't notice a speed increase is that I can type as fast as I can think with either layout. If I wasn't putting sentences together in my head and then typing them, but rather typing pre-authored content verbatim, I'm sure I could type much faster than I do.
I know both QWERTY and Dvorak as well and I have to agree with you on your point of less fatigue. Your fingers don't move nearly as much as they do on a QWERTY keyboard.
However, I haven't noticed any increase in speed with Dvorak. Perhaps I might if I was a secretary and typing pre-authored material into a word processor, but I don't do that kind of work and I find I type as fast as I speak to myself in my head on both layouts.
I have heard some good things about Colemak, so maybe I'll learn that next and see if it beats Dvorak in the comfort area.
I don't clearly understand the author's point of view either. Besides, everybody knows that Django is a Model-Template-View pattern and not a Model-View-Controller pattern anyway.
Patterns shmatterns. Django is awesome either way.
I don't know if I believe this. We've had blind passengers riding around with people for a very long time and I don't recall anybody complaining that talking to blind people while driving a car increases one's risk of an accident.
I think our brains function differently when talking on the phone. They make us dumber. And my hypothesis can be readily observed in any public place where people are chatting on cell phones.
Performance and scalability aside, I think any Oracle guru would be happy with a switch to PostgreSQL because it is so much easier to install and use.
Personally, I use Scrum and a text document. I don't like apps like MS Project very much because I feel they do a poor job of realistically planning and tracking a complex project.
I agree. While I did go to college for a while, I never finished because I started getting the kinds of jobs I was going to college for.
Without a degree, I have worked for Microsoft, Intel, Novell, and several other companies; all with a good salary.
I have had one interview with a guy who, once he realized I didn't have a degree, threw a girly tantrum about the importance of college, but most companies just want to know that you can do the work and are more than willing to accept real-world experience in place of a degree.
PostgreSQL isn't the problem, things like psycopg2 are. My wording wasn't the best in my original post.
Thank you for the information. I was talking about libraries, not PostgreSQL itself though.
However, since you mentioned it, 9 steps is a pretty big pain in the butt when you can do everything you just said in two steps on Debian:
1) apt-get install postgresql
2) create a postgres user
As fun as ./configure && make && make install are, I want to dink around as little as possible with installations. :)
No offense taken.
I had problems with Psycopg2 and one other Python/PostgreSQL library not building in Leopard due to its 64-bit-ness.
Installing Python, PostgreSQL, and Django is easy, but the necessary libraries between Python and PostgreSQL were not (perhaps it has been fixed by now).
No, Macports does not work right for Python and PostgreSQL. For one thing, a couple of the libraries needed to do Python/Django programming don't compile correctly. For another thing, a lot of the libraries that are available for Python 2.4 in Macports are missing for Python 2.5+.
Macports is a good tool when it works, but it doesn't always.
It would be great if it actually worked. Macports needs a lot of work before it can even remotely be compared to dpkg.
WingIDE from Wingware.
Eclipse with PyDev Extensions is nice too, but WingIDE is a lot better, in my opinion.
I really like developing on my Apple machine for the most part, but it has a few issues that make it less appealing to me than Linux.
Currently, most of the development I'm doing is using Django and PostgreSQL. Installing PostgreSQL and the required Python libraries on OS X is tremendously painful. It was painful on Tiger and Leopard has made it more so. Macports tries to make it easier, but it could use a lot of work/testing/more work.
Installing the same tools on Linux is so easy, a Windows user could do it.
I don't think it is as much about discounting Apple's success as it is minimizing the "me too" nature of Microsoft's business.
He or she is saying that people who don't succeed will find any loophole that enables them to blame their inability to succeed on others. He or she is absolutely correct.
I second this. I think Wingware is the best Python IDE available. It is a bit costly though. I also like PyDev-extensions for Eclipse, but not anywhere near as much.
In spite of all that, I mostly use TextEdit for all my editing needs.