Now that Ebola is actually a threat to rich white people living in developed nations, we can expect that new treatments will be created soon.
Treatments were under development long before this outbreak. But of course, when they become available, you'll just assume that development started after the first cases in the US and Europe.
I suspect those that turned down other university offers for this one, only to find out they weren't accepted and no have no-where to go...
The email was corrected within 7 hours--pretty unlikely there are any damages to anyone other than the huge disappointment.
It's a lot like that, it just appears easier on the surface, misleading many middle-of-the-road developers in to thinking they've got it all figured out after a quick tutorial.
Good point. And I think those are the ones defending node, not the ones criticizing it
(FYI, I've been working with event-driven asynchronous programming daily since 2001. I do think I've got it mostly figure out...)
Javascript on the server-side is total bollocks. Now that the client has gone smart again, because the browser *is* the client-side env, therefore Javascript has clearly won as *the* client-side language, and this means the server may become lean and mean again, because it can dispense with all the GUI, HTML, etc.. nonsense.
Good point.
The JavaScript world meanwhile has developed a kind of Stockholm syndrome...
Yep. Go to any support forum for node and point out what a pain in the ass it is in node to actually handle all paths, including errors, correctly, and just watch the comments rain down reaming you for not understanding event-driven programming. When I started looking at newer backends that might handle reactive stuff better than RoR, all the info seemed to point to Node.js. When I actually started learning it, I was horrified.
Node.js isn't fast. It's concurrent.
For an extremely limited notion of "concurrent". Also, extremely outdated, even though an awful lot of people who are ignorant of computing history have convinced themselves that it's totally new & revolutionary. (I've been asynchronous reactive programming for nearly 15 years, and the way node does it is just awful.)
Ad hominem-ing your way through the slashdot echo chamber I see.
Nope. It is crystal clear that the poster is severely homophobic. Maybe you should read it again, carefully, and note the unfounded assertion based purely in bias, the deprecation of the suffering of a certain segment, the derogatory references to those who support them, and so on. The post was sickeningly vile.
People don't choose to get cancer. AIDS, however, is almost completely voluntary. Nice job, throwing slurs at dissenters, though. That's the way to show tolerance!
1) Many people in the west voluntarily choose to engage in behaviors which greatly increase their chances of getting cancer. So, in developed societies, much cancer is voluntary according to your definition. Meanwhile, in Africa, many women have no choice whatsoever about being forced into activities from which they contract AIDS, and their children are certainly not born with it voluntarily.
2) First off, the basic point the "dissenter" made was completely incorrect, there is not so vastly more research effort going to AIDS than there is to cancer and there is no factual basis that would lead one to such a conclusion, it was purely an unfounded assertion. Second off, my supposed "slur" was nothing more than reading what was obvious from the derogatory way he (yes, he, that too is obvious) referred to gays and those who advocate for their causes.
I could go on and on because the substantial growth in cancer rates...
Good post, except for that bullshit that people so like to repeat. There is substantial decline, not growth, in cancer rates. This has been true for decades.
I just wish half as much effort had been put into fighting cancer as has been put into fighting AIDS over the last three decades.
And what exactly makes you think that is NOT the case? Oh, wait, I see, you're a homophobic idiot who just assumes that because you see actors on TV talking about AIDS, that somehow there's no money being spent on cancer research anymore. You really could not be more wrong if you tried.
...living in Denver (higher elevations)...
Living outside Denver in the Rocky Mountains. (Granite, everywhere, we build on it. One of these days I'm going to reset my radon monitor and put it outside for a few days...)
The fact that it is even called 'the most dangerous toy' is evidence that some people need a serious beating.
No, what they deserve is for you & I to demonstrate to them the dangers of law darts
60db is only 1/3 of an order of magnitude above 20db. 200db is one order of magnitude above 20db and is like a canon going off and no city is that loud consistently. Two orders of magnitude above 20db would damage hearing at 2,000db.
You fail. db is a logarithmic scale. 10db is a factor of 10. 60db is 4 orders of magnitude from 20db.
I mean way out there where you will find very few people nearby. It is difficult to find words to describe how nice and peaceful it is when it's so quiet - not to hear noise of any kind, except from nature.
I know. I chose to live in such a place
The claim is done in the context that the show hadn't started yet.... Once the show's started, all of that changes, of course.
OK. I'll agree with that restriction.
Aside: back in the 1980s when electronic publishing was new, and still very expensive and very much not for the desktop, Seybold was the big show for that industry. Kodak personnel would hide their name badges when they'd visit other booths, in an attempt to not be noticed. (Yeah, that worked really well, NOT.) And they were notorious for grabbing personnel from other vendors by the elbow and strong-arming them out their booth. Somebody would complain to show management, show management would pay them a visit, and they'd stop. For a while. Then they'd start doing it all over again. Unless you were in a company where you competed with Kodak, you'd never have a clue how unethically that company was run--Polariod was just the tip of the iceberg with regards to their IP theft and dirty dealing. I've been out of that industry for over 25 years, but I still felt a little glimmer of glee when they went under...
It has just been discovered that research causes cancer in rats.
