Comment irst Post ! (Score -1, Offtopic) 54
or those that didn't notice.
or those that didn't notice.
your nice language
please note that the ad hominem in my comment was rethoric. It was actually referring to the content of your article and the attitude it implies. I think it should be obvious but maybe it is worth pointing it out now.
of course many may have learnt something interesting from the ensuing threads. like with any other discussions. that's the cool thing about fora. but I still find that simply dumping the full set of requirements for your assignement on a public forum isn't professional or nice at all. you can ask what you want but one would expect at least some evidence of effort on your part, too. of course this could be subjective and you might view this differenty. this is just my standard, doesn't necessarily apply to you, so no hard feelings.
and no, I know nothing about "lrd" and googling produces little of relevance, this even has spurred my curiosity a bit about how it relates to you inspecting my posting history. any clarification would be appreciated. peace
It's interesting that the Microsoft announcement is MORE support for Mac and LESS support for Windows.
The next generation of interesting software will be done on the Macintosh, not the IBM PC.
-- Bill Gates, BusinessWeek, 26 November 1984
Many major companies also rely heavily on older versions of IE
some people just don't learn.
Indeed. I'm curious why is not "closed source, with a strong industry support" an option?
i guess because he knows what kind of crap *that* can be.
of course his full requirement list is ridiculous, nevertheless as a request to the community on a public forum. anything else? this dude is just looking for someone else wanting to do his fucking job, but he also wants a medal for it (read: a tap on the shoulder). likely he *is* in a "closed source, with a strong industry support" environment, so screw him.
i'm afraid you misunderstood that mm was just an example for GP's point which was that current freshmen are taught in a too high level of abstraction. sw engineering tools have evolved a bit but are still far from perfect, resource availalability has increased a lot but resources are still finite. today you absolutely need to have a clear picture of what is happening at lower levels to make good decisions at high level.
i don't see a solution for this anytime soon since this comes only from experience, and academic degrees would take a lot longer (that's not a good thing for our education models which are basically efficient factories of skilled workers). on top of that, abstraction levels tend to get higher, so there is less opportunity to tinker with stuff. if you are an old hack you have learnt as technology evolved, so you have naturally gone through all that from scratch. new generations don't. that's their strong point (because their naivety may result in astounding innovation) but at the same time their weakness (because they implement like shit), at present. maybe when we have far more sophisticated execution evironments this will be less of an issue. now it is, and it simply means a degree means very little, only hr guys "value" that.
Figure that one out, and commercial software will be dead tomorrow.
Why must it die? Has the "world been saved" then?
dunno, but the moment there is no "commercial" anything, the world will have learned.
Actually, I would have reversed that and said that the latter implies malicious intent.
All the marketing folks want to do is sell you stuff. The Gov wants to throw you in prison, or worse.
all of them actually want you buying stuff constantly.
but on a pure semantical level, marketing naturally implies profit, while government should be synonymous of "caring for the res publica", even though in our particular reality government is nothing but another marketing tool.
1. It is not possible to exert mind control over an intelligent and reasonable person simply by throttling their social media streams.
yeah but it's hivemind control. hivemind oriented individuals are a majority, so hivemind control is actually a reality. and a pretty obvious one if you ask me. now for example you may not be buying this bullshit but it is your hive, and you can't escape: these hivelings may be your relatives, your friends, people you like or love. you screwed, bro. in other words: controlled.
of course the problem itself points to the way out. let's not despair!
oh my. will this be the end of vi/emacs flames?
Ann election must be free, equal, and secure. To ensure equality, the count must be repeatable for everyone. Online voting vor any voting machine does not provide that feature.
citation needed. also you could tell us about the last time you repeated a count for paper votes. there are indeed methods to perform verifiable counting electronically, you just don't know about them. the tricky part here is "for everyone" as in "without any specialist knowledge on the subject" (quoting the very same ruling you wrongly cited, see below). fair enough. however, you actually *do* need some specific knowledge to repeat and validate a count on paper, at least you need to be able to read and count. there's people around who can't even do that. as society progresses it should not be unreasonable for some degree of computer literacy to be considered normal.
The German supreme court ruled that voting machines do not allow real democratic elections.
the german *constitutional* court ruled that the *specific implementation of voting machines* used in the 2005 bundestag election didn't meet the requirements.
http://www.bundesverfassungsge...
And it is not a good argument that voting machines or online voting is faster. Fast and convenient is not the core concerns for democracy. The above criteria are.
this i totally agree with. note also that i'm not an online voting advocate at all. it's just critics mostly tend to use weak (if not plain wrong) arguments.
totally agree.
besides, if implemented well online voting can be as secure and verifiable as any other method. the real problem is still corruption.
on a higher level, the system is already rigged: if you control the media you simply manipulate the elections as a whole, e.g. in the us there is no need to risk commiting electoral fraud: with things as fox and cbs and an ignorant and acritic majority of the population you can plant any sockpuppet you need.
also works on the local level, completely legal:
http://tech.slashdot.org/story...
i'd say OP could be a good example of this, having "reservations against online voting" and wanting to "fight" it just because it is "online", without any sensible description about the system and the suspected flaws. this nonsense is so common, our democratic societies systematically move focus away from every important aspect of political discussion. we absolutely love having red herrings jumping around us, voting ends up being just a ritual.
Pretty much that. Even Norway tossed it after trials
fyi, that bbc article was utter nonsense, just plain wrong in almost every aspect:
http://www.regjeringen.no/en/d...
A doctor stuck a stethoscope in his wife's ear
is that what she said?
same as car and motorcycle drivers,
The argument is that it causes unforeseen health complications, not that it is dangerous. Since the great streetcar scandal, Americans have had literally two choices: own a car, or be left behind economically.
not at all, the argument is that it acounts for more than 50% of global pollution, including the production chain. the health consequences on the whole population are far worse than those derived of smoking.
factory workers and owners,
see above.
Which provide substantial benefit to others.
there you might have a point, citing yourelf: "literally two choices: own a car, or be left behind economically". great stuff!
smartphone and computer users,
What? You are no longer in left field. You have left the ballpark.
see above, dickhead.
meat and processed food consumers, etc., right?
There is no evidence that eating meat is bad for you, and in fact eating only meat and vegetables has been shown to have immense benefits for some people. Now you've gone from standing outside the ballpark to just being a fucking idiot.
Not all processed foods are evil, although that's the way to bet. But our government has told us to eat them, essentially, so they (we) are on the hook for that one. When it's had anything to say about it at all, the government has told us not to smoke.
there actually is evidence of several negative effects of meat but nevermind. processed food is shit, and it's produced mostly from meat grown to be processed. this whole industrial process is an environmental disgrace and a sanitary hazard your government is not willing to protect you from. in fact healthcare services are flooded with direct victims of this. now tell me something funny about smoking!
shouldn't we be taxing processed food to oblivion, by the same argument?
FORTRAN is not a flower but a weed -- it is hardy, occasionally blooms, and grows in every computer. -- A.J. Perlis
