Let's just keep it all off the record, shall we?
Let's just keep it all off the record, shall we?
Okay... A couple weeks ago, I decided to take another look at Python-- the first such look I've given the language since around 1997.
So far, I have the basic stuff down. I've got a quick script down that provides functions to add ANSI colors to my output, so I have that going for me.
I have Python 2.x on a VM on my work system, but I'm using Python3 on my home system.
Now I need to look at learning classes and lambda (I know OF classes but I've only heard of lambda in passing), and that may take me a while.
What is wrong with this code? It's like I can have the inner loop execute, or the outer loop execute, but not both.
DECLARE @RC int
DECLARE @BatchMatch varchar(40)
Declare @mcount int
Declare @dcount int
While @mcount <13
Set @BatchMatch=Right('00'+Convert(varchar(2), @mcount),2) + Right('00' + Convert(varchar(2),@dcount),2)
Set @mcount=@mcount +1
PS, no I don't care that all months don't have 31 days, but I must cover months that do.
Update- failed to reset the inner loop counter, that's what.
Publish or perish, right? d_r; f-bomb: let's write for JCRAP.
"The idea of, you know, building a wall, kicking everybody out, and ending birthright citizenship all sounds appealing in some respects to some folks. But I just think it's a very complicated problem. And it needs someone who understands how to do a complicated and nuanced solution to that problem," Christie said [...]
Fuck nuance. And fuck those who are relativists and excuse-makers who try to use the concept to moderate on what is unequivocal. dam_reservoirs and fussycrackwitch are obviously commies. ISIS is obviously an Islamic terrorist organization. We obviously can build a fucking wall. Trump is popular right now because about a sixth of us in this country are tired of mealy-mouthed pussies.
"Appealing in *some* respects"?!? In what respects is it *not* appealing, to build a wall, kick out the illegals, and stop the madness? Presumably he means such things are unappealing to Leftie Republicans.
"Now what I said was if we wanted to have comprehensive immigration reform, I'd be willing to listen to anything. But the truth of the matter is that that's not something we should be being focused on. That's an applause line," he added.
When two paragraphs up he said:
And I think the difference here in my approach is they know that I'm a guy who knows how to enforce the law," he said.
Umm, what good is it to us that you know how to enforce the law, when you think it's not something worth focusing on?
And everybody knows by now that "comprehensive" reform is code for shifting the policy Leftward. In this case, an all-of-the-above approach of giving us both amnesty and not securing the border.
Why is Christie running? (Or Jeb for that matter? Or fucking Lindsey Graham?) Why is he even in the GOP? Mark Steyn said something to the effect that Republican establishment candidates are good choices because they give such great concession speeches. So Christie's big plan is to alienate the Conservative base and appeal to the big donations class of the party? I.e. raise a lot of money and get no general election votes? I guess how that strategy and inevitable outcome is a good thing is "nuanced".
p.s. Megan Kelly *is* a bimbo. I saw (part of) some segment when Dinesh D'Souza was on, talking about some of the very real shit that was happening to him. That guy has been watching and writing about Leftie trends in America going back to at least the 90's "Illiberal Education". As I recall he basically said what everyone knows, that amounted to saying that Obama is basically an American communist. And then Miss "hee hee look at me I have my own TV show!" immediately laughs and says that's crazy. Dinesh was floored. He's a (admittedly biased) researcher, she's a fake-blonde airhead "TV personality". I guess Roger bumped mutt-faced Greta out of prime time because she's not a breezy enough blonde. Next he should ditch the ditz and put Shannon Bream in that spot. She's guest-hosted the Brett Bair nee Brit Hume news hour and done so credibly.
p.p.s. I got side-tracked there. What I want is someone who'll forget about how "complicated" or "nuanced" a problem is and just start doing the obvious things to address it. And it's 2015 in America, Constitutionality is no longer a problem, when we have assholes like Roberts and Kennedy who'll lick their fingers and stick them in the wind to decide what would be best for whichever way the country is veering at the time.
I will preface all this with an honest admission that this...scandal...could derail her chance at nomination. It could even, theoretically, leave a bad enough impression on a big enough chunk of the electorate to lose her the general that far. It might. Certainly a lot of man-hours and money will be spent trying, that's for sure. Though it is nice to see Republicans finally doing something about unemployment.
But honestly, it's most likely going to blow over, and there are several solid reasons why.
1. No one gives a shit. Let's do the circuit: Leftists have 2 reasons not to care, not liking Hilary in the first place as well as considering it not an offense to have been sloppy in the handling of minor state secrets. Liberal Democrats want to woo her and conservative Democrats are her base. Independents are tricky, but this is still small cheese, so they'll vote for the person who's not going to invade the middle east and their uterus.
After that, you're left with the remaining 30% who are hoping for a Guantanamo Bay finish to this story. And they're kinda busy right now with the hands-down most interesting Republican primary in 40 years. Oh, and imminent doom, there's always imminent doom. Tends to make one want to focus. Anyway, they hate Hilary already, have done for almost a quarter century now. What are they going to do, hate her more?
2. I know the election cycle starts waaaaay earlier these days, but the shot, such as it were, was fired too damn early. It's 15 months until the election, ain't noody going to remember that shit, no matter how hard you pound the airwaves. All people are going to hear is "email". Hell, millenials barely know what email is, except that it's old and antiquated. You might as well be accusing Hilary of improper use of a horse and carriage.
3. You should have learned the lesson from Benghazi. If 9/11 and the worst implementation of a major land war in Asia cannot separate an apparatchik's head from his shoulders, what makes you think this will? Hell, what makes you think it should?
You can not win the game, and you are not allowed to stop playing. -- The Third Law Of Thermodynamics
Kind of like trying to get straight answers out of some I could name on here.
Fustakrakich, as usual, is irrefutable. We could as well argue that all information technology is just variations on the theme of 1 and 0. This wisdom will surly help my link-time issues with libtiff. Thanks!
Set in stone:
-Clinton will be the Democratic nominee for President
-Biden will never enter the race for nomination
-Neither will Warren
-Trump will not secure the GOP nomination for President
-Trump will not go third party*
-Warren as Dem VP pick
I got no fucking clue:
-GOP nominee for President
-Whether it goes to convention or not
Happy to eat crow if I'm wrong. Mainly putting this up as a sanity check for all the political media I have to consume daily.
*I got a bad feeling I'm wrong on this one, but human laziness is as powerful a force as vanity. Always bet the long game.
I was tipped off, in another's journal, to the line of thinking involved here. Obama simply thinks that "there is a bit more nuance at work".
"The Man is Hiding the Stash" Fallacy
At Belmont Club, Richard Fernandez says of the Marxist Piven's philosophy:
The problem with Piven's theory is that events in Europe have shown those"âoemajor economic reform" to be unsustainable, if not actually ruinous. However, she appears to believe that the European crisis is only apparent, being the result of the Man hiding the Stash. Find that stash and things become sustainable again.
I think this fallacy deserves its own name because I think this is the central economic fallacy of leftists in general. Whether we are talking about unions, public workers, redistributionists, etc., there is always the implicit idea that somewhere there is this big pile of money that the rich business people are hoarding away like a squirrel with its winter store of nuts. Leftists tell everyone that all problems can be solved if we just use the force of the state to threaten the squirrels to give up their nuts.
From a tablet user's perspective, Windows 8.1 had a pretty good version of IE. It was full screen (to see the URL bar/tabs/bookmarks, you had to actually affirmatively ask for them by swiping from the bottom), they made good use of gestures (swipe left and right to move through history, etc), and the browser was... well, IE, not the world's best, but it's fairly efficient, fast, and compatible.
They removed that IE interface in Windows 10 (only the desktop IE remains.) The alternative is supposed to be Edge, but it has no gestures, and is never full screen in the same way.
Worse, Edge seems to kill performance on my tablet. The browser itself only ever seems to take up single digit percentages of CPU but regardless when I start it or have it running the entire tablet grinds to a halt. Close it, and performance goes back to normal. I have no idea why. Given the low CPU usage I wonder if it's just the way it uses the graphics drivers or something similar, but it makes it unusable.
I've switched to Chrome in the meantime, which contrary to early reports and Mozilla's outburst, is actually very easy. Chrome also has the same problems as Edge in terms of not being really full screen, but it doesn't have the performance issues, and it does have the intuitive (and better than trying to hit buttons with a finger) gesture based UI that IE had.
Tablet mode in general seems a step down in Windows 10 from the Windows 8.1 approach. Oh well.
My linux skills have atrophied. I need to set up 10 workstations today. I have one done. What is the *easiest* way to clone a partition in ubuntu 14?
Update: Ghost 4 Linux and LinuxLive USB Creator to the rescue. I haven't had a usable copy of Ghost since floppies ruled the emergency boot sector, now, I'm going to buy a 32GB keychain drive off of Amazon and make sure I am NEVER without a copy of G4L. Drive imaging in an emergency is just way too useful of a skill to have.
In a five year period we can get one superb programming language. Only we can't control when the five year period will begin.