I think the idea is that the actions average out to neutral. The character may do good or bad actions, but there is no particular bias toward good or bad. Just as a good or evil character may occasionally do bad or good actions, respectively, but they each have a consistent bias over the collection of all of their actions.
How did I insult you? I think that suppression of speech is unreasonable and will never give positive results. If your argument is one of censorship, then it is an stupid argument. But there's no need to take this debate so personally. I'm not angry at all; I'm laughing... it's funny that I have to defend free speech.
The best way to fight stupid ideas, like Nazism and censorship laws, is to argue with them. Using force in place of open debate, like both the Nazis and the modern German state does, so clearly doesn't get the desired results. Also, the fact that censorship is the law in Germany doesn't make it a valid position. I'm free to argue against your dumb laws and you're free to argue back... Or you can just act offended. I don't really care either way.
...NO ONE will sympatise with you. You won't be a martyr but osterised. And rightly so.
Keep telling yourself that. Meanwhile, there is a population of actual neo-Nazis in Germany, responsible for all sorts of violence up to this day. Meanwhile, in countries where they can have their little marches and we can all attend to laugh at them, their numbers have dwindled to almost nothing.
You can keep attesting that suppressing speech gets positive results, but the facts don't seem to support your argument. In forums hosted in the US like Slashdot, we'll not outlaw your stupid authoritarian arguments, but we will laugh at them. No amount of capital letters in your arguments can force us to accept them.
This approach could go a long way to protecting some pretty heinous hypothetical government abuses. People could be disappeared and, as long as they didn't have family that could claim damages, the government could claim that nobody has standing to challenge the practice. This is a very dangerous line of reasoning.
There used to be a web page called "Your Eyes Suck at Blue". You might find it on the Wayback machine.
You can tell the luminance of each individual channel more precisely than you can perceive differences in mixed color. This is due to the difference between rod and cone cells. Your perception of the color gamut is, sorry, imprecise. I'm sure that you really can't discriminate 256 bits of blue in the presence of other, varying, colors.
Rather than abuse every commenter who has not joined your specialty on Slashdot, please take the source and write about what you find.
Given that CPU and memory get less expensive over time, it is no surprise that algorithms work practically today that would not have when various standards groups started meeting. Ultimately, someone like you can state what the trade-offs are in clear English, and indeed whether they work at all, which is more productive than trading naah-naahs.
And so many CPUs 8080, 8085, Z80, 6809, 6502, 68000, 8088,8086, TI TMS 9900, NS-32016 and goodness knows what else.
With the Enterprise Architect comes the authority to lead. You don't need admin access so much as you need to cultivate loyal, capable followers from the SA's that you are leading. They should be the implementers of your architectural designs.
I do agree with the poster that you may need user level access to servers and/or the capability to configure/build different software in userspace before deploying it at a system level.
But Enterprise Architect is a leadership role mainly. From your explanation, you've been trying to lead and influence decisions all along, now they're giving you the authority to do so. Seize the opportunity!
The law should NEVER, EVER, EVER, provide protection over any data available behind public sector activity.
The public sector frequently claims the release of information will be burdensome; however, the public sector actors are not always forced, by statute (as they are in Minnesota) to ensure records should be held in a way which the sector cannot claim burden in failure to comply.
This needs to change.
The only "tech" things I ever seem to use in a car are cruise control and the entertainment system. On a recent trip I had a rental car with all the in-car controls on a touch screen. I appreciated the convenience of being able to adjust the cruise control and climate control, play tunes, tune the radio and so on, all from a common interface. This is a car, dammit, not a mobile computer laboratory. Techie toys must do more than be cool. They must solve problems.
I'm reminded of airplane glass cockpits. Pilots rarely need exact numbers, most of the time they just need a glance at an analogue display. "Full power...confirmed! Gauges green...airspeed alive...rotate..."
Funny but a friend of mine called the Apple II a toy but then he had a PDP-11.
Actually the AppleII was a better computer than the Vic-20 but it also cost many times as much.
Frankly I loved all the computers of the late 70s early 80s. So many new ideas and so many systems and all of them you could learn inside and out except for the Ti-99.
...I don't know what's in that connection, as it's TLS.
Is the TLS certificate hardcoded, or will it accept certificates from another CA if you add them to the Windows CA store? Let's try to crack that sucker open...
God doesn't play dice. -- Albert Einstein