Ok, but by that logic, they should be teaching accounting rules and business logic long before they should be teaching calculus, since the majority of jobs in the field work with those disciplines.
I don't know if it was fair for him to conclude that the OP was a web programmer based on that claim - but he was right.
No, he was using "web developer" as shorthand for "stupid moron." It was nothing more than an insult, and it simply didn't belong here.
For the record, I never said that calculus is useless for every computer programmer everywhere; that's ridiculous, I'd never make that claim. What I was *trying* to say is that I'm making a very good living without knowing anything about it, therefore it's not necessary for making a good living at programming. (Which is true.) I don't know why people read it the other way around and took so much offense.
I'm not arguing that nobody uses it. I'm simply saying that the use of calculus depends on the problem you're solving with your program, *not* the act of programming itself.
I prefer to make things usable for regular people. It's as noble a field as any in computer science, and I'm definitely making "things of any value", it just doesn't require calculus to do. I don't know why this is so hard for people on Slashdot to understand. (There was also a post from someone who writes compilers, in which he says he also doesn't use calculus; surely a compiler is a "thing of any value?")
What you are talking about now is a completely different issue, and sounds like a problem with the course that you chose. I agree that is problematic - although there's nothing special to CS and calculus here. My maths course required me to do some programming. Some programming courses require you to pass science papers. That's got nothing to do with whether such things are used in the real world.
Maybe it doesn't, but it should.
No, you mean it wasn't designed for what you were interested in. Why did you take it?
Because I was interested in programming computers for a living. And CS was the only program in my university that met that interest. Why are we going over all this again? Did you not read my last post?
Is calculus required for all CS courses? If so, it might be a fair point.
Yes! At that school it was! I just freakin' said as much in the last post I made. Christ.
Can I complain that programming shouldn't be required for maths, and therefore the people who designed the Cambridge mathematics degree have "zero practical experience"? (!)
Feel free, I don't give a shit what you do. I'll just start pre-typing up all these exact same explanations again for when you make another reply without bothering to read my post and I have to repeat them yet again.
Cambridge obviously didn't do such a great job with the reading comprehension.
I don't see how Adobe is related to the topic. PDF is not an "Adobe's format" anymore. PDF can be implemented by anyone without requiring any deals or license from Adobe. There are hundreds of feature-rich open-source implementations. PDF has nothing to do with Adobe.
Yes, everybody thought so. Then Adobe got pissy at Microsoft for implementing it. This news was widely covered everywhere, including Slashdot.
Whom did they sue? Can you give us some references?
I have to correct myself, though: They didn't actually sue, because Microsoft settled first (by relegating the PDF support to a optional install.)
What Adobe wants is irrelevant. Nobody needs Adobe's permission to implement PDF support. Anyways, can you give us some reference to Adobe's behaviour?
Yes, everybody thought that. Then they got pissy at Microsoft for implementing it. Wow, this conversation is kind of repetitive.
ms didn't "back-down". It truly hates the idea of providing proper pdf support.
Actually, they did. Is your memory seriously this short? It only happened, what, 2 years ago? It was covered in all the trade press, extensively, it got probably 1000+ comments on Slashdot stories. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.
So you actually think it was a conspiracy on Microsoft's part.
Of course, the code *does* exist. It shipped in preview versions of Office 2007, before Adobe got pissy. It's available for free download on their website right now... so I guess that kind of blows holes in your conspiracy theory.
It's impossible in your close-minded world that Microsoft actually developed PDF support because: 1) Adobe said it was an open standard and anybody was welcome to use it 2) Their customers requested it?
Doesn't Occam's razor kind of suggest that instead?
What new product has MS announced that was not met with criticism and derision?
This is Slashdot. If MS announced that they're moving all their employees to a 25-hour work week with free massages and providing company Audis, they'd be met with criticism and derision. In short, "criticism and derision" of Microsoft means approximately jack shit on this site.
What have they done in the last 5 years that improved the personal computing world?
I could respond to this, but why would I bother? You'd just criticize (and deride) whatever I said, even if it was a genuine improvement for the personal computing world.
The MS way of doing things is no longer the ONLY way to do things.
Was it ever? They've always had lots of competitors in the server space, and at least one competitor in the desktop space.
There are entire countries that have rejected MS products,
And there are entire countries that use virtually nothing but MS products. Guess which list is longer.
When entire countries and industries reject your products you have a serious problem.
I dunno, cigarette companies are still doing ok.
MS has not and is not addressing that problem. They seem to be blindly going down the same road that led to this situation without concern for how they will make money in the next decade.
What "solution" do you propose, exactly? Assume you're Steve Ballmer; what do you do next?
(That said, I frankly don't agree with the direction Ballmer's taking the company. But at the same time, you have to realize they've made huge gains in markets Microsoft was almost unheard of in just a few years ago, like video gaming. In any case, if things were really even slightly close to bad, people would be calling for Ballmer to resign, and nobody is.)
If you don't like Microsoft, you could be cheering that they wasted all their money developing this "completely useless" language that "no one will use."
But seriously, I don't know why the concept of "if you don't like it, just don't use it" is so goddamned hard for people. Microsoft's not forcing it on you, you know.
I'm not going to bother making all the same points I've made in other posts on this thread. Click my username and read them if you like, but please, please if you're going to reply to something I've written, please bother to check the other things I've written so you don't waste your (and my) time.
Yeah, but that aside, it's super poor-form for Adobe to crow about how open and standardized PDF is, then sue a competitor for implementing it. If you didn't want PDF in Word, you shouldn't have opened up the format idiots. Adobe's trying to have it both ways, and shame on Microsoft for backing-down.
Does it have an equivalent to Word's Normal View, and are the outlining features on-par with Word's?
Last time I tried OpenOffice (about a year and a half ago), there was no Normal View, and the outline mode was simply pathetic. I seem to also vaguely recall that you couldn't split the scrollbar, but that might have been an earlier OpenOffice problem...
I'm not ignorance of basic math, I'm ignorance of calculus. And I'm not proud (or ashamed, really) of it at all.
Look, here's the reason I posted that: I was part of a CS program at a university that required calculus. I failed calculus more than once (go ahead, make fun of me), and as a result I ended up dropping out of the program and feeling terrible for years. I'd go as far as saying it wasted years of my life working a dead-end support job.
Imagine how I felt after learning that, hey, calculus is actually mostly useless for the vast majority of software development jobs. Universities are losing students by making pointless requirements that have nothing to do with the field the students are studying, and I think that should stop. That's all.
The phones themselves can be designed with CAD software:) And as I say, calculus is used immensely in that - I assure you it's not abstracted away from me.
Yes, I understand that, but it's entirely beside the point. You write a program to solve problems requiring calculus, so yes you need to use it. You don't need to use it because you're writing programs, you need to use it because your problem domain requires it.
Thus, calculus has zero to do with programming. If you wrote tax software, would you expect the university to give you thorough training in tax codes?
On the one hand, I agree that it's perhaps unfair the way that CS courses often require other subjects (I did maths myself, but at my Uni, CS students had to do maths and sciences too in the first year). OTOH, if the course doesn't have what you want, then don't take it.
You miss the point; my school required me to pass Calculus as part of the CS program. I didn't have the choice to not take it and remain in CS.
I literally dropped out of computer science because I couldn't do the calculus, and when I got into the private sector I found out that the calculus was useless, utterly useless, to the vast majority of jobs in the field. That school wasted years of my life, and made me feel like a failure, because their program was designed by someone with zero practical experience.
But for some reason, there seems to be this stigma with maths of being "of no use", and I'm just surprised to see it even here on Slashdot.
I'm sure it's useful for hundreds or thousands of jobs. But it shouldn't be required for computer science programs any more than learning tax code should.
I guess that's true of all subjects, but it's particularly depressing with maths, when you consider it's the subject pupils often ridicule as the least useful, when it today's world, it's one of the most used I would say ("But how is this of any use", whines the kid who then goes and texts someone on his phone, or goes and plays an FPS).
This is all kind of off-topic, but what you're missing is that that has nothing to do with "programming" persey, it has to do with solving the problem domain. (As another poster replied on this thread.)
I can almost guarantee that the guy who wrote the text messaging code for the phone didn't use any calculus. The calculus was abstracted away by the one person who wrote the chip that controls the phone's radio. Same with the FPS game; the vast majority of games developers don't even see or use calculus. Most games companies license an FPS engine from some other company, or if they create their own engine, it's only a couple people at the company who need to know it.
The reality is that only the programmers who are making, for example, cellphone radio chips, or FPS rendering engines need to know calculus at all. What percentage of total programmers is that, compared to the number who don't need calculus? A very, very small percentage.
And frankly, I could be the most successful, highest-paid web application developer on Earth and never touch the stuff. My first university, though, wouldn't give a CS degree out until you knew it-- why? Imagine how many otherwise-excellent programmers are dropping out of CS programs because they can't hack the obscure math, it's criminal.
Actually, I am "some kind" of web developer. It's something like 70% Javascript, 20% SQL and 5% ActionScript, 5% xhtml/css/etc, if you must know.
Of course, I'm sure you meant that as an insult, something like, "oh a web developer! They're so stupid! No wonder they don't know math! Ha ha ha!!!" To which I reply: screw you.
(That all said, the data visualization people where I work might use it all the time, I don't know. But I'm making a good living with computers and I don't know jack about calculus.)
Which is why I've never been able to learn calculus.
Seriously. I've yet to encounter a calculus teacher who actually explains what good it is in the real world. (Considering I'm almost 30, I program computers for a good living, and I've never used it, I'm thinking: it ain't.)
Re:Thats all very well in theory...
on
Linux 2.6.27 Out
·
· Score: 1
As history has shown, Microsoft does NOT do the same thing, unless compelled to by international courts, and even then the documentation they produce is almost worthless.
Why would they? The problem isn't Microsoft's, it's the motherboard maker who isn't complying with the spec. All Microsoft is doing is adding code to work around their problem.
If you think that Microsoft should tell Linux how to do this, I suppose you also think IE should tell Firefox how to render IE-only sites, instead of Firefox pressing for sites to follow the standards, right?
There's no reason that the Linux community couldn't resolve the problem the same way Microsoft does: code workarounds for known bugs, and press the motherboard industry to fix their damned products.
From where I sit, Microsoft seems to manage it on multiple projects, as does Apple, and they seem to be moving as fast as the Linux kernel is moving. Or faster.
Re:This is a huge amount of work
on
Linux 2.6.27 Out
·
· Score: 1
If you suggested that every single change to the codebase be reviewed by multiple developers in a traditional proprietary software development house you would be, rightly, laughed at. There simply isn't the resources.
WTF!? If Microsoft can manage it on the Windows and Office teams (two of the largest software teams on earth), somehow I think it's not nearly as unusual as you say.
You'd be laughed at? Really? Do you seriously work at a place where, not only does nobody know anything about XP, they actually make fun of it?
Re:Not in upcoming Debian
on
Linux 2.6.27 Out
·
· Score: 1, Funny
I always found it annoying, under Windows, to have to hunt down drivers.
When's the last version of Windows you used?
I've never bothered to hunt down a driver in XP or Vista, except for upgrading video card drivers. (Windows will do that automatically, but only to stripped-down versions without gaming features.) Joysticks, webcams, scanners, USB keys... everything's automatic and has been for awhile.
People are buying music and video legally over the internet. Digital distribution is the future and the big boys better embrace it rather than fight it.
Um, they've kind of already done all that. Or maybe you've been sleeping while: * Netflix * iTunes * Xbox Live * Windows Media Center/Zune * Hulu * Amazon * Napster * God-knows who else
Set all of this up? You need to update your anti-copyright screed, buddy.
how much money did Sir Tim Berners-Lee give up when he made HTTP and HTML free?
A lot possibly. And that is the problem with monopoly laws (copyright/patents/etc) in general. He would have earned lots of money at the expense of the rest of society getting poorer.
Wait, what?
How would Tim Berners-Lee keeping the web proprietary deprive society of anything? When he created it, he was creating value (of information exchange) where there was no value before. And yes, he could have become immensely wealthy doing that (Bill Gates did it with software and made a few bucks). But the rest of society wouldn't have gotten poorer, it would have been the exact same as before.
I guess you could say "the rate of wealth increase would have been less," but that's a far cry from "poorer" which implies losing wealth.
Slashdot Mirror
Ok, but by that logic, they should be teaching accounting rules and business logic long before they should be teaching calculus, since the majority of jobs in the field work with those disciplines.
I don't know if it was fair for him to conclude that the OP was a web programmer based on that claim - but he was right.
No, he was using "web developer" as shorthand for "stupid moron." It was nothing more than an insult, and it simply didn't belong here.
For the record, I never said that calculus is useless for every computer programmer everywhere; that's ridiculous, I'd never make that claim. What I was *trying* to say is that I'm making a very good living without knowing anything about it, therefore it's not necessary for making a good living at programming. (Which is true.) I don't know why people read it the other way around and took so much offense.
I'm not arguing that nobody uses it. I'm simply saying that the use of calculus depends on the problem you're solving with your program, *not* the act of programming itself.
I prefer to make things usable for regular people. It's as noble a field as any in computer science, and I'm definitely making "things of any value", it just doesn't require calculus to do. I don't know why this is so hard for people on Slashdot to understand. (There was also a post from someone who writes compilers, in which he says he also doesn't use calculus; surely a compiler is a "thing of any value?")
What you are talking about now is a completely different issue, and sounds like a problem with the course that you chose. I agree that is problematic - although there's nothing special to CS and calculus here. My maths course required me to do some programming. Some programming courses require you to pass science papers. That's got nothing to do with whether such things are used in the real world.
Maybe it doesn't, but it should.
No, you mean it wasn't designed for what you were interested in. Why did you take it?
Because I was interested in programming computers for a living. And CS was the only program in my university that met that interest. Why are we going over all this again? Did you not read my last post?
Is calculus required for all CS courses? If so, it might be a fair point.
Yes! At that school it was! I just freakin' said as much in the last post I made. Christ.
Can I complain that programming shouldn't be required for maths, and therefore the people who designed the Cambridge mathematics degree have "zero practical experience"? (!)
Feel free, I don't give a shit what you do. I'll just start pre-typing up all these exact same explanations again for when you make another reply without bothering to read my post and I have to repeat them yet again.
Cambridge obviously didn't do such a great job with the reading comprehension.
I don't see how Adobe is related to the topic. PDF is not an "Adobe's format" anymore. PDF can be implemented by anyone without requiring any deals or license from Adobe. There are hundreds of feature-rich open-source implementations. PDF has nothing to do with Adobe.
Yes, everybody thought so. Then Adobe got pissy at Microsoft for implementing it. This news was widely covered everywhere, including Slashdot.
Whom did they sue? Can you give us some references?
http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39273094,00.htm
http://software.silicon.com/applications/0,39024653,39159285,00.htm
http://www.techweb.com/wire/software/188701275
http://www.pdfzone.com/c/a/Authoring/Adobe-to-Sue-Microsoft-Over-PDF-Support-in-Office-2007/
http://www.itwire.com/content/view/4509/53/
http://news.cnet.com/2100-1012_3-6079320.html
http://www.betanews.com/article/Microsoft_to_Drop_PDF_Support_in_Office/1149284222
I have to correct myself, though: They didn't actually sue, because Microsoft settled first (by relegating the PDF support to a optional install.)
What Adobe wants is irrelevant. Nobody needs Adobe's permission to implement PDF support. Anyways, can you give us some reference to Adobe's behaviour?
Yes, everybody thought that. Then they got pissy at Microsoft for implementing it. Wow, this conversation is kind of repetitive.
ms didn't "back-down". It truly hates the idea of providing proper pdf support.
Actually, they did. Is your memory seriously this short? It only happened, what, 2 years ago? It was covered in all the trade press, extensively, it got probably 1000+ comments on Slashdot stories. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.
So you actually think it was a conspiracy on Microsoft's part.
Of course, the code *does* exist. It shipped in preview versions of Office 2007, before Adobe got pissy. It's available for free download on their website right now... so I guess that kind of blows holes in your conspiracy theory.
It's impossible in your close-minded world that Microsoft actually developed PDF support because:
1) Adobe said it was an open standard and anybody was welcome to use it
2) Their customers requested it?
Doesn't Occam's razor kind of suggest that instead?
"Throwing shit and seeing what sticks" is as valid a tactic as anything else.
What new product has MS announced that was not met with criticism and derision?
This is Slashdot. If MS announced that they're moving all their employees to a 25-hour work week with free massages and providing company Audis, they'd be met with criticism and derision. In short, "criticism and derision" of Microsoft means approximately jack shit on this site.
What have they done in the last 5 years that improved the personal computing world?
I could respond to this, but why would I bother? You'd just criticize (and deride) whatever I said, even if it was a genuine improvement for the personal computing world.
The MS way of doing things is no longer the ONLY way to do things.
Was it ever? They've always had lots of competitors in the server space, and at least one competitor in the desktop space.
There are entire countries that have rejected MS products,
And there are entire countries that use virtually nothing but MS products. Guess which list is longer.
When entire countries and industries reject your products you have a serious problem.
I dunno, cigarette companies are still doing ok.
MS has not and is not addressing that problem. They seem to be blindly going down the same road that led to this situation without concern for how they will make money in the next decade.
What "solution" do you propose, exactly? Assume you're Steve Ballmer; what do you do next?
(That said, I frankly don't agree with the direction Ballmer's taking the company. But at the same time, you have to realize they've made huge gains in markets Microsoft was almost unheard of in just a few years ago, like video gaming. In any case, if things were really even slightly close to bad, people would be calling for Ballmer to resign, and nobody is.)
That is just my opinion,
Yup.
If you don't like it, just don't use it.
If you don't like Microsoft, you could be cheering that they wasted all their money developing this "completely useless" language that "no one will use."
But seriously, I don't know why the concept of "if you don't like it, just don't use it" is so goddamned hard for people. Microsoft's not forcing it on you, you know.
I'm not going to bother making all the same points I've made in other posts on this thread. Click my username and read them if you like, but please, please if you're going to reply to something I've written, please bother to check the other things I've written so you don't waste your (and my) time.
Or, in short: you've utterly missed the point.
Yeah, but that aside, it's super poor-form for Adobe to crow about how open and standardized PDF is, then sue a competitor for implementing it. If you didn't want PDF in Word, you shouldn't have opened up the format idiots. Adobe's trying to have it both ways, and shame on Microsoft for backing-down.
Does it have an equivalent to Word's Normal View, and are the outlining features on-par with Word's?
Last time I tried OpenOffice (about a year and a half ago), there was no Normal View, and the outline mode was simply pathetic. I seem to also vaguely recall that you couldn't split the scrollbar, but that might have been an earlier OpenOffice problem...
I'm not ignorance of basic math, I'm ignorance of calculus. And I'm not proud (or ashamed, really) of it at all.
Look, here's the reason I posted that: I was part of a CS program at a university that required calculus. I failed calculus more than once (go ahead, make fun of me), and as a result I ended up dropping out of the program and feeling terrible for years. I'd go as far as saying it wasted years of my life working a dead-end support job.
Imagine how I felt after learning that, hey, calculus is actually mostly useless for the vast majority of software development jobs. Universities are losing students by making pointless requirements that have nothing to do with the field the students are studying, and I think that should stop. That's all.
The phones themselves can be designed with CAD software :) And as I say, calculus is used immensely in that - I assure you it's not abstracted away from me.
Yes, I understand that, but it's entirely beside the point. You write a program to solve problems requiring calculus, so yes you need to use it. You don't need to use it because you're writing programs, you need to use it because your problem domain requires it.
Thus, calculus has zero to do with programming. If you wrote tax software, would you expect the university to give you thorough training in tax codes?
On the one hand, I agree that it's perhaps unfair the way that CS courses often require other subjects (I did maths myself, but at my Uni, CS students had to do maths and sciences too in the first year). OTOH, if the course doesn't have what you want, then don't take it.
You miss the point; my school required me to pass Calculus as part of the CS program. I didn't have the choice to not take it and remain in CS.
I literally dropped out of computer science because I couldn't do the calculus, and when I got into the private sector I found out that the calculus was useless, utterly useless, to the vast majority of jobs in the field. That school wasted years of my life, and made me feel like a failure, because their program was designed by someone with zero practical experience.
But for some reason, there seems to be this stigma with maths of being "of no use", and I'm just surprised to see it even here on Slashdot.
I'm sure it's useful for hundreds or thousands of jobs. But it shouldn't be required for computer science programs any more than learning tax code should.
I guess that's true of all subjects, but it's particularly depressing with maths, when you consider it's the subject pupils often ridicule as the least useful, when it today's world, it's one of the most used I would say ("But how is this of any use", whines the kid who then goes and texts someone on his phone, or goes and plays an FPS).
This is all kind of off-topic, but what you're missing is that that has nothing to do with "programming" persey, it has to do with solving the problem domain. (As another poster replied on this thread.)
I can almost guarantee that the guy who wrote the text messaging code for the phone didn't use any calculus. The calculus was abstracted away by the one person who wrote the chip that controls the phone's radio. Same with the FPS game; the vast majority of games developers don't even see or use calculus. Most games companies license an FPS engine from some other company, or if they create their own engine, it's only a couple people at the company who need to know it.
The reality is that only the programmers who are making, for example, cellphone radio chips, or FPS rendering engines need to know calculus at all. What percentage of total programmers is that, compared to the number who don't need calculus? A very, very small percentage.
And frankly, I could be the most successful, highest-paid web application developer on Earth and never touch the stuff. My first university, though, wouldn't give a CS degree out until you knew it-- why? Imagine how many otherwise-excellent programmers are dropping out of CS programs because they can't hack the obscure math, it's criminal.
Actually, I am "some kind" of web developer. It's something like 70% Javascript, 20% SQL and 5% ActionScript, 5% xhtml/css/etc, if you must know.
Of course, I'm sure you meant that as an insult, something like, "oh a web developer! They're so stupid! No wonder they don't know math! Ha ha ha!!!" To which I reply: screw you.
(That all said, the data visualization people where I work might use it all the time, I don't know. But I'm making a good living with computers and I don't know jack about calculus.)
That was really creative and entertaining when I first saw it back in 1998. Thanks for the blast from the past.
Next time, however, maybe you should attempt to come up with, you know, a *new* joke.
Which is why I've never been able to learn calculus.
Seriously. I've yet to encounter a calculus teacher who actually explains what good it is in the real world. (Considering I'm almost 30, I program computers for a good living, and I've never used it, I'm thinking: it ain't.)
As history has shown, Microsoft does NOT do the same thing, unless compelled to by international courts, and even then the documentation they produce is almost worthless.
Why would they? The problem isn't Microsoft's, it's the motherboard maker who isn't complying with the spec. All Microsoft is doing is adding code to work around their problem.
If you think that Microsoft should tell Linux how to do this, I suppose you also think IE should tell Firefox how to render IE-only sites, instead of Firefox pressing for sites to follow the standards, right?
There's no reason that the Linux community couldn't resolve the problem the same way Microsoft does: code workarounds for known bugs, and press the motherboard industry to fix their damned products.
From where I sit, Microsoft seems to manage it on multiple projects, as does Apple, and they seem to be moving as fast as the Linux kernel is moving. Or faster.
If you suggested that every single change to the codebase be reviewed by multiple developers in a traditional proprietary software development house you would be, rightly, laughed at. There simply isn't the resources.
WTF!? If Microsoft can manage it on the Windows and Office teams (two of the largest software teams on earth), somehow I think it's not nearly as unusual as you say.
You'd be laughed at? Really? Do you seriously work at a place where, not only does nobody know anything about XP, they actually make fun of it?
I always found it annoying, under Windows, to have to hunt down drivers.
When's the last version of Windows you used?
I've never bothered to hunt down a driver in XP or Vista, except for upgrading video card drivers. (Windows will do that automatically, but only to stripped-down versions without gaming features.) Joysticks, webcams, scanners, USB keys... everything's automatic and has been for awhile.
People are buying music and video legally over the internet. Digital distribution is the future and the big boys better embrace it rather than fight it.
Um, they've kind of already done all that. Or maybe you've been sleeping while:
* Netflix
* iTunes
* Xbox Live
* Windows Media Center/Zune
* Hulu
* Amazon
* Napster
* God-knows who else
Set all of this up? You need to update your anti-copyright screed, buddy.
how much money did Sir Tim Berners-Lee give up when he made HTTP and HTML free?
A lot possibly. And that is the problem with monopoly laws (copyright/patents/etc) in general. He would have earned lots of money at the expense of the rest of society getting poorer.
Wait, what?
How would Tim Berners-Lee keeping the web proprietary deprive society of anything? When he created it, he was creating value (of information exchange) where there was no value before. And yes, he could have become immensely wealthy doing that (Bill Gates did it with software and made a few bucks). But the rest of society wouldn't have gotten poorer, it would have been the exact same as before.
I guess you could say "the rate of wealth increase would have been less," but that's a far cry from "poorer" which implies losing wealth.
Kutztown Kutztown Kutztown. Kutztown? Kutztown Kutztown Kutztown Kutztown, Kutztown Kutztown! Kutztown, Kutztown Kutztown: Kutztown.
Kutztown?
Lameness filter encountered.
Your comment violated the "postercomment" compression filter. Try less whitespace and/or less repetition.