No, it's not the same thing.

"Wealth distribution" often is used to describe the "income gap" between the rich and the poor... That is, simply describing the situation as it is now.

"Wealth redistribution" is (mandated) Robin Hood-ing, taking from the rich and giving to the poor.

Pure capitalism optimizes to make money, and thats it. Worse, it tends to only look at what profit can be made in say the next year or so. Doing the kinds of things required to address the water shortage is likely to not be a money maker, at least not that quickly.

(I agree with you a tiny tiny bit regarding needing environmental laws to slightly temper the "pure capitalism" tendencies, if one is to dump their sewage in the river behind the factory.)

Yet Tesla & Space-X are both for profit companies, making big long term gambles on huge industry changing goals.

Also, while it's not the same, recently I've heard of the exact opposite, charity, being done quantitatively. Some people are finally looking at the investment/reward "payback" of various charities.

You mean wealth *redistribution*, right?

I haven't read *today's* news on the subject.

But about the original patent, everybody complains about the patents that someone got for "X _ON THE INTERNET_" when X was already patented. Yeah, that's ridiculous.

Shouldn't it work the other way, though? The originally patented idea DOES seem to me to be analogous to podcasting. I originally thought it sounded dumb when Carolla (whose podcast I listen to and enjoy), described it, but reading about it in more detail made it seem like a reasonably patentable idea *IF ANYTHING IS*.

I never read the comic, but I seem to remember the film being an average or maybe slightly below average of the big budget superhero movies that started (IMHO) with the Tobey Maguire SpiderMan.

I really don't know why everyone hates the movie.. Both of the recent Hulks were watchable too, yet most everyone seems to think at least the first one was horrible. (I watched the two near each other, I think on consecutive days, to compare.)

Why would it take multiple commits to fix a bug? If it's all in one project, I'd *hope* that was all in one commit. (I'm not saying in the real world it works out that way, but it would optimally be so.)

But if "deleting" a branch just hides it from whatever the equivalent of "svn ls BIGANNOYINGURL/branches", then great. (So if it just hides it, can you tell it to tell you the full list?)

Wow, I can't believe I'm defending svn....

But as far as I understand (and as far as I've been *using* it for several years now), there are not "specially named directories". There is a user-created convention of directory names and locations..

But underneath, there's NO difference between a tag directory and a branch directory.. (Which _annoys_ me, since I wish I could "lock" tag directories so I don't accidentally check into them, which I think I did once.. then undid of course..)

I guess this is a case of the grass is greener on _your own_ side of the fence.. Since git is reaaaaallly complex to me (and svn is complex compared to cvs, but I've MOSTLY gotten over that part).

Branch per bug? Why not just do the bug fix, and commit it after you've tested the fix? You end up with a ZILLION "pointless" branches after that. (You obviously can know what checkin did the fix in svn or cvs, so you still have the history of what the actual fix was, so can revert or modify it if necessary.)

This is not intended as simply a "citation needed" response.. The earliest case I remember is from the Mac OS 7.5 T shirt:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/...

How the !@$ do I make "-a" default for commit? The fact that it's NOT the default is one of the !@$!@$!@ confusing things about git.

(git is more difficult/confusing than svn which is more difficult/confusing than cvs.. and no, cvs wasn't the first source repository I ever used.. if svn truly was "a better cvs" like it claimed, without the huge URLs, I'd say it was undeniably better.)

Umm, no, you're not actually agreeing with me..

I'd love to have a ping pong table & pinball machine(s). (We actually used to have a ping pong table, and the group probably still has it, there's just no room for it.)

I *totally* wish I got the famous perks from other high tech companies.. But the one perk I *do* get is the office with a door.

Huh? The free drinks & free food don't extend your work day.. They could *in theory* shorten it.. (e.g. half hour on site free lunch vs hour long go out to lunch).

Other ways to goof off, yeah, that _could_ lengthen one's day if they abuse it.

(BTW, I don't get that free stuff that FB and google, etc., get, but I do have an office with a door.. I'm definitely jealous of that free stuff you mention, but *don't* want to work out in an open room with a zillion people.)

I know he says a "NES version of the chip" later, but saying 6502 then variant later is confusing.. (Just like the 2600 doesn't use a 6502, it uses IIRC a 6509.)

The NES uses:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...

So the Christian Right in America are terrorists then, plain and simple.

They seek to deny people access to things which don't match their religion, they expect to force their beliefs on everybody, and they feel god is on their side. And they seek to use their religion as an excuse to deny freedoms to other people.

But for the most part, they *aren't* currently going out and killing other people en masse.

This is the only one of the April Fool's posts I thought was funny.