Surprised to see someone mention one of my favorites. One of the few games where even losing was fun. Took a hit to the oil line? Now you've gotta get back to friendly borders before you crash.

I found the copter controls/weapons management to be a nice balance between complex and arcade. I also loved getting to pick my loadout for each mission. Was a fun game for a computer that had only 512Kb ram.

Granted VS can be pretty annoying, it shouldn't be hanging crashing that much. Extensions, even the really cool looking ones, have stability issues. I used to have more issues until I ditched almost all the extensions I had installed.

Do you have it setup to get-latest from TFS on solution open? I only get latest before I checkin to verify that there are no conflicts. This minimizes changes and dependency rebuilds. Sure YOU didn't change anything, but if you have it configured to get latest when you open solution, you are bound to get other peoples changes in dependencies.

Why Cancel at #6? That's only going to put you back at #1. You're making an annoying problem into an impossible never ending problem. Was your plan to cancel the build, and then have a stern talking to with the compiler and ask it not to compile dependencies? Only way you are going to control that is to reference DLL's instead of projects, which obviously isn't a solution, but point being if it decides for whatever reason it wants to compile a dependency, you aren't going to make things better cancelling the build.

38% of voters considered it an improvement if they opted for that method over the other(that's not to assume their outcome experience was better). Probably in Netflix's beginning their subscriber base was only people who already watched movies, and simply found it more convenient. They may not have initially turned non-movie watchers into movie watchers. Obviously that wasn't Netflix's goal metric, but the point being that the preference 38% people showed could be an indicator that it could me marketable to non-voters to turn them into voters.

Sometimes your goal metric isn't realized during trials, but you can gauge user satisfaction/preference as an indication of its potential. I would say getting 38% during a trial is pretty huge. Usually when you are trying to get people on board with something new it can be much more challenging. With marketing they might increase voter turnout. Obviously you have to look at the feasibility of it, and the cost is certainly a valid decision point. I just think it's a little silly to focus on one metric and call it failure based on such a narrow slice. If the cost-benefit doesn't meet your threshold and you want to bring to an end, fine, but that doesn't mean it is a failure!

Plenty of advancements faltered on their first outing before their time because there weren't enough driving factors in place to tip the cost-benefit ratio. Some of the first hybrid trials were followed by automakers saying that it was a failure and that they'd never make one, and some of those same automakers are making them today. Never speak in terms of absolutes or history+future will make you look like an idiot. Darn, that statement was an absolute.

These are all valid points. I was not implying that mathematics is anything like voting, nor was I presenting an opinion for or against online voting, nor was I trying to imply that online voting is the same caliber of breakthrough as the electronic calculator.

I was merely poking fun at the logic/reasoning presented in the summary of why they considered it a failure. You can list 1000 valid reasons why online voting is a bad idea, that doesn't change the humor of the particular logic presented in the summary :)

What logic is this? We found that although nearly a third of mathematicians used electronic calculators when they were invented, the electronic calculators did not encourage previously non-mathematicians to be mathematicians, so we threw them all away.

Even as a democrat I would have voted you down for bringing Repo/Demo conflict into a conversation that is anything but. The vast majority of people don't understand CC licensing. It is something only SOME artists and SOME programmers and maybe a handful of other types of content authors are familiar with, which is a minority of a minority. Even those familiar with the concept are unclear in the nuances of the licensing. So you can bet lots of people from both parties are unfamiliar with the licensing model, and thus you can expect those leveraging such content to make mistakes in documenting the licensing and attributing works. Therefore one must conclude that regardless of the party affiliation of your workforce, you must address this issue.

You sound pretty arrogant, maybe you should join the Republicans.

You're talking about history integrity, he's talking about gated checkins. He isn't worried about someone messing with the history, he's simply preventing images be added to the repo without certain metadata also being included with the image. It's not a matter of someone trying to subvert the history, but a standard addition of a image file with some insurance that it include the metadata that documents its licensing.

Did someone mention a no-GIT source control? -> If yes, mention GIT regardless of how irrelevant it is to the current conversation.

It is true that once that version of a photo is released under the license, then they can't revoke it, but you must document this as you can't guarantee the owner removes the statement that it is licensed.

This is what the OP is asking about, as you need to document that they released the image under that license at some point in time.

You are both idiots for not knowing how to argue. Zeromous, perhaps your point is "Someone can be hosting a cloud locally to support a business/agency. So it can be available over 1gbit LAN with indiscernible latency, or be in a geographically close data center with an interconnect of equivilant bandwidth."

But you didn't provide any supporting facts so your equally ridiculous.

Zeomous of poor reading comprehension says: "I'm still trying to figure out what you exact beef here is." when Russ had just said "lags and stutters".

Anyhow, usually what people host locally is not a cloud infrastructure, since if you're not doing hosting for third parties, and only your own organization, your virtuallization needs are met by a simpler cluster architecture. Some call it a cloud infrastructure, but usually is just a virtuallized cluster. Virtuallization != cloud. Cloud involves virtualization. Not all virtualization is a cloud. Very much the not-all-black-birds-are-crows kind of thing.

Excellent advice.

Hallelujah! Trying to select text and it grabs the whole word, or worse, some programs grab the whole word plus a space. Why do I want trailing spaces with everything I paste?

As a developer thinking about how I can "help" the user, I always favor the perspective that the user knows what they want.

Some developers make the "they can disable this feature" excuse. The frustrating thing is every time you get a new desktop/phone/upgrade/update you find yourself disabling the same options again and again. Only a small handful of products remember these kinds of settings across devices/installs.

Wasn't it nice when at least space programs still worked together and were kind of outside the scope of international quarrels. Astronauts working together, at least to me, were a symbol of how we were still all civilized people who had a lot of common interests and could work together peacefully.

What part of "similar meat from the same part of the cow" do you not understand?

Point being, since you probably are too stupid to pick up on it, that cooking steak longer at higher temperature does not necessarily mean it will be like leather. If it does, then you're doing it wrong.

He preemptively prooved your an idiot: "similar meat from the same part of the cow cooked to a much higher temperature longer as a pot roast"

Have you ever had pot roast? If you've had good pot roast it is the opposite of leather. Either your stupid, illiterate, or both.