But it still takes them out of the trusted sandbox, FWIW.

...and are adding P/Invoke to Silverlight last I heard.

Not all music graduates are in orchestras. Many are average and simply play in local bands, if they even continue on with music that is.

Going the degree route is absolutely meaningless because of what little they teach in college. In fact it's a liability because if you were already a good programmer at age 18 (an age you know you enjoy programming rather than chase the dollar) you wouldn't have pursued it.

In fact, because the supply of gold stays relatively static over long periods of time (barring gold rushes that never happen in modern times and are vastly less frequent or severe than quantitative easing), prices actually go DOWN as more goods match the same money, which means purchasing power RISES.

That's actually a good perspective.

You will never eliminate money as long as you have human freedom and incentive. And to contemplate eliminating human freedom and incentive would be demonic.

No they haven't. Look to Slashdot itself for the winner between Lotus Notes and Outlook.

Don't speak so dismissively of your next president. Your desperate repetition that she is unelectable does not make it so.

The health care "reform" was designed to MAKE you a serf. But you won't realize this until you can't move under the chains. Fortunately most of the country has realized this and will say so on Tuesday.

And what is the set of all zeroes that come before the 1? The retarded guy is the one who jams mismatching puzzle pieces to finish a picture that doesn't exist (psst that's you).

Buy their stock and the profits will go to you too.

Long division followed by long multiplication?

That's not division/multiplication, that's a for-loop. When do you perform your corny "proof" operations? After a million nines? A trillion? After infinity nines? Well then you will never have your chance. You can't perform an operation on a value that is never presentable. That is the principle of the matter, and helps explain why everything that sounds hokey about these proofs really is.

Putting an infinite number of 9's, "with a 1 at the end", is nonsense. If the 9's end anywhere, they weren't infinite - so where does your 1 come from?

Your 9's terminate at the initial decimal point. Or did you hope I wouldn't notice? What is that, half-infinite? Is that really the desperation here? Once you see any multiple or offset of infinity appear, you're fucked, and your efforts to rationalize whose infinity is better sounds retarded.

And where did your 9's come from? So you get to break the rules of decimal notation (pretending that algorithms can be written as numeric literals) but I don't?

Any child can see that 0.99... will never be 1 because it is always separated by 0.0...1. Yes people, the Emperor has no clothes, and you ought to laugh at these "mathematicians" who use fallacies to prove fallacies. You're doing "operations" on algorithms that never complete, using a base-10 digit system that is only capable of expressing constant values.