Comment Re:Case insensitive file systems were a bug (Score 1) 148
All the complexity you need to add is:
if (ch <= '\x1f') {
goto FAIL;
}
How hard is that?
All the complexity you need to add is:
if (ch <= '\x1f') {
goto FAIL;
}
How hard is that?
Sorry, I have to work around sales-schmucks all day long.
Contamination...
"ongoing cultural conflict"
What conflict? Some jackass gets up in my face, telling me what I "ought to do" or "ought to say" or "ought to be", I tell them to fuck off and tongue my ass-crack while they're at it.
If they persist in getting in my face, I claim self defense and shoot the motherfucker in the face with a high-caliber weapon to insure INSTANT harmony.
End of story.
Seriously. This kinds of shit is why they pissed away their market lead and utterly destroyed their entire market share.
They keep going for a minute market segment that barely exists, and thinks that the rest of us will hop on board to be with "the cool kids".
What they don't understand is that they've drawn themselves a venn diagram and aimed for the absolute smallest piece of the pie.
Yes, it doesn't require the kind of investment that aiming for a larger market segment does.
But, if you miss with that segment, you crash and burn.
And worse, they aren't even doing the research to even verify the market segment they're aiming for:
A) Can handle the entrance of the device.
B) Exists in the first palce
RIM has been dogfooding so long that they're institutionally blind.
I had a buddy at RIM try to tell me their tablet device was going to rock the market. Couldn't understand why I laughed and laughed and fell on the floor and laughed some more when he told me I basically had to buy into RIM's entire hardware ecosystem to take advantage of the thing. That it wasn't available as a stand-alone device.
Not sure that he still works there. Hopefully the high-decibel flushing sound that's been going on at RIM for the last decade or so will have infused him with a little perspective. Even if his bosses are still acid-tripping on ground up Blackberry 10 phones.
The myth that owning guns automatically ensures safety is a product of ignorant, agenda-pushing, wussies.
Yep. And the agenda most of them are pushing is for gun control.
Since nobody with an actual brain in their head thinks that a gun *automatically* ensures safety.
I used the phrase "thinkers", not "elites". Those groups I "give credit" to are huge. I don't hesitate for a moment that there are members of those groups who have the intelligence at hand and the foresight to see where things are going and to prepare for them. Lumping everyone in those groups as either/or doesn't make sense.
Regardless, you still give them way, way too much credit.
I like how the body of water is measured in "Oil Reserves".
It's a body of methane, not water, and it is chemically much more closely related to oil than water. So it arguably makes more sense to compare it to the amount of oil on earth than to the amount of water.
he "thinkers" in govt, business and academia know this. The increasing militarization of the police, the complete disregard for the Constitution, the NSA monitoring everything, etc is getting ready for this.
You give the elites credit for way, way too much foresight, organization and discipline.
When nearly all of your readers block ads, it's tough to make it as an ad-supported site.
(Yes, I have AdBlockPlus installed, too.)
Virtual Reality Experiment Wants To Put White People In Black Bodies
See, this is exactly the sort of thing that Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking have been warning us all about. First of all you try and simulate reality. Then your program gets smart enough that it starts to formulate desires. Next thing you know it wants to experiment with brain transplants and bioengineering techniques. Before you know it...
Wait
Why didn't they say that in the first place?
In a word...
MANBEARPIG!
There is a place in the Dalles, Oregon where Google maps will try to make you take a left through a guard rail and off a 30ft tall retaining wall. To be fair the street does continue down there.
Have you submitted a correction?
If not, please post a link to the location, so I can.
The conditions species live in aren't constant. Advantages of A and/or B fluctuate over time. If an animal has A, and the environment suddenly favors B, those closer to B win. For a while some animals will have both.
However, every feature comes at an energy cost, so animals quickly let what they don't need atrophy. If in the current environment B beats out A+B minus extra energy to generate both, then they will settle at B only.
At any rate, every organism is a mixture of thousands of features, from A0 to Z99999, many of which get added and deleted all the time, so your whole argument is bogus to begin with.
MESSAGE ACKNOWLEDGED -- The Pershing II missiles have been launched.