Comment Focus. (Score 1) 473
And not waste time on Slashdot all day.
And not waste time on Slashdot all day.
This question is not meant as flamebait. I wonder that every time his name is brought up. I could be wrong, but I'm not aware of any significant piece of software he's developed since the ones that that he's well known for, that were written before the turn of the century.
You're obviously no fool, and you know this is the best thing that's ever happened to your blog. Youtube videos that you posted a mere two months ago are showing less than 100 views, but your most recent one where you discuss this issue has 23,000 views. I understand why you're acting so glum -- it should sweeten the "pain and suffering" damages you'll eventually get -- but not all of us are fooled by the act.
I'm not saying I blame you a bit, just that I'm not buying the "woe is me" schtick.
Nope, it's the laws that have no room for exception and interpretation that are among the worst kinds.
Laws where you can show mercy, where you can recognize the limits of human capacity, are actually among the best kinds.
At least, as long as humans continue to be imperfect.
I prefer my justice blind, thank you.
That's not to say I think that laws can't prescribe a range for punishments, for example 1 to 5 years in prison for something, with a judge considering various factors while deciding the actual sentence.
But there should be no built-in provision for non-enforcement. If you're not comfortable with everyone being equally subjected to a law, perhaps the activity in question should not be illegal.
In this case, the couple did nothing illegal, they're just being penalized because of what happened on their property centuries before they were born. That goes against the notion of basic fairness held by most people. That's why the law has to contain provisions for "relief".
Why do you assume that the process to get relief is arbitrary? I'm sure they have some reasonable guidelines written somewhere.
Really? What makes you so sure?
Yep, because of muckraking reporting that neglects to mention that the couple can file for relief which will almost certainly be granted.
That doesn't mean the law is in any way just. In fact, laws that have arbitrary and selective enforcement built in are among the worst kinds.
Do these people ever give it a rest?
I don't think your age is an issue, but the fact that you asked the question:
"do I have a chance of becoming good at programming?"
indicates that you have at least some level of doubt. And the fact that you have doubts about your own abilities raises doubt in my mind about your abilities.
Just naive, that's all.
Get a grasp on the concept of marginal costs, and it all might start to make sense to you.
What is the most recent code you've written that has been released in a production-ready state?
The daily reference intake for sugar states that added sugar should nto exceed 25% of calories.
For a 2000 Cal intake that is 500 Cal. The 7-eleven shitty "super gulps" and whatever exceed this
in a single serving.
If you ask me they should just go and make a law that a single serving cannot contain more than
50% of the reference intake. That way you can sell those stupid 5 pint "drinks". You just would not
be allowed to have half a pound of sugar in them.
So real freedom means NOTHING to you?
Obviously not, and it's a pretty sad state of affairs. Sugar is not nearly as big a threat to our society as the ever-growing segment of the population who pine for a nanny state to treat them like children and take away their choices.
Drinks used to be served in smaller containers, and society survived just fine. Restaurants started using larger containers to exploit flaws in human psychology, allowing them to trick customers into buying more than they want or need. This is done to make more money, and to hell with the health of the general public.
Your free will isn't as all-powerful as you think it is. There are a great many people spending billions of dollars every year on cutting edge science to control your purchasing decisions, and you don't stand a snowflake's chance in hell against them. Only as a group can we fight back.
Thankfully, there are government nannies and other assorted busybodies who will save us.
Oh, one thing comes to my mind: They could allow for large servings under the condition that the glass/cup will have multiple mandatory photos of repulsively obese people on it. Just like with cigarettes and the warning labels on them.
Do the busybodies who are convinced they're smarter than everyone else, and hence, entitled to manage their lives, ever rest?
Do you want it installed today, or do you want to wait a week while I write up instructions and scripts and test them in a clean environment (that will probably need to be built from scratch)? And, of course, while I'm doing that I won't be working on the other projects everyone's been hounding me for. Is it OK to push the delivery for those back a week? Your call.
We quickly found out that even with games that hadn't been in print in 20+ years and that frankly never sold worth a shit in the first place (we're not talking Doom here folks, we are talking those cheesy knockoffs and platformers and puzzlers) that when we found the owners the amount of sheer fucking insane levels of greed was beyond nuts. There were several wanting 4 and 5 figures up front NOT for the code, NOT for even the complete game, but just for the right to use the original shareware! And many wanted the rights to OUR code on top! The sad part is we also found that we could just go the Chinamart route and say fuck the IP bullshit and get it done that way.
Sounds like they gave you guys the "go away and quit bothering me" price. I might do the same thing if someone contacted me out of the blue asking me to sign over rights to something for them to sell, with the assurance, of course, that they "never expected to make any money" off it.
It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.
