>you build one time that takes an hour or so What madness is this?? You build the set one time following the instructions because that's what's on the box. Then you destroy it and use its parts in whatever else fantasy mashup constructions you want. That's the true genius of Lego, and it's capacity to educate and inspire kids - giving them a system in which they can build their own ideas.

The Sumerians had tablets and writing a thousand years before Moses wrote his do's and don'ts.

>The latter does not seem to happen in Egnlish. Yeah because it is a) written and b) has no central authority on what the language can contain, or has the power to update the language. The written aspect means that it's frozen it its current state apart from the addition of new words which are added more than any other language on the globe and (b) means that nothing can be revised.

I remember the SX-64. Even back then the screen was just too small to actually be useful. Oh and it was so big and heavy!

By definition if a program is downloaded by a million people and it serves their use case then it's not a shit program. Even if the way it is designed its totally shit awful code spaghetti if the program can do the thing that its users want at the speed they want to do it and it doesn't affect the battery to the point where they stop using it then it's a viable product. Of course there is a ecstatic pinnacle where best practices in coding meet a use case, but the underlying is not as important as meeting the users requirements. Even if I do agree with you that every programmer should at least attempt to write code following best practices.

I don't know that blindly optimising for one set of resources is a good thing. My grandpa would say the same thing when us kids worked in the shed, he would constantly remind us to collect the nails from the timber we were re-purposing, and straighten them and put them into jars because once upon a time in the great depression nails were much more expensive than they were now, and you couldn't go down to the store and get 100 for a dollar, and in any case you didn't have a dollar. In this sense grandpa was really optimised for nail and resource consumption, but perhaps he was not optimised for time consumption. So he was optimising for resources in a time where he would have been a better manager to optimise for time.

When you talk about code optimisation you are always talking about a trade off. In old systems you were forced to optimise for memory and processor time at the expense of time, money, security and memory protection (robustness) optimisation. Now, with far more memory and processor cycles available to us than most programs need we can optimise for other things - example: we can use frameworks and libraries to manage memory so that programs although they don't run as fast as they would if optimised for memory and processor they don't leak memory, and their performance is adequate for their use case. It also takes a lot less time and resources to develop now.

So what I am saying really is when you say something like "99.999% of today's programmers have no fucking clue what code optimisation really means", well the truth is that they do, but that they are optimising for the elements that are the most scarce rather than the elements that are now relatively abundant being memory and cpu time.

Germansdon'thavelongwordstheyjustdon'tlikeusingspaces, much.

The sad part isn't that English doesn't keep original pronunciations, the sad part is because English is a written language we can never bring all of these words into line with each other and rationalise their pronunciations. If English were a spoken language only then all these little glitches would be ironed out very quickly and it would actually start to make sense. But for some reason it has been seen to be 'proper' to freeze English and how it is used at a particular point in time and regard all changes from this point to be illiterate.

The problem with English is that it's stuck halfway into metamorphosing into a different language from its old Germanic roots to what would be a really quite different language. And the reason that it's stuck is because it is written. So all those things that seem to be nuances or glitches of a complex language such as the silent 'h' in school or the 'e' that hangs on the end of name are actually dead aspects of an older language that were actually once functional -- name was once pronounced nam-eh, just as millions of English as a second language speakers mispronounce it. But these glitches refuse to go away because now we have things like dictionaries which forever preserve these dead artefacts of forgotten language as though it were a part of our living English. They are kind of like the dead congenital twin still stuck to the living baby.

How naughty is it to lie on your resume? I mean are we talking a faux pas that will get you scowled at and potentially lose your job or are we talking fraud that could land you in prison?

Very hard. Even the SAR aircraft operating out of the nearest airport at Perth only have fuel for a couple of hours loiter time. If you are planning a return leg of a trip to that region of the world it pretty much has to come from Australia.

Certification.

The pilot could have locked himself in the cockpit and killed himself. The plane would have flown on under the law of the fly by wire system until it ran out of fuel and crashed.

>the FDR's record everything they say. The FDR's record the last two hours of everything they say. After two hours the last two hours is written over. So depending on when it all happened we might not learn a whole lot from the FDR.

Even if they pick up the black box we still may never know what happened. If the events that caused the aircraft to crash happened more than 2 hours before the plane crashed, and it looks like those events happened probably 5 hours before, then the black box will not reveal much, as it only records the last two hours of data.