I was responding to advice to read your own code first. You need to follow the context in order to understand who is responding to what. Lots of subthreads exist, and they tend to vary in direct relevance.
Somewhere, I have a coffee cup that says CRS on it in large letters, and underneath reveals this to stand for "Can't Remember Shit"
I love that cup. Wish I knew where it was.
conversations which take place over iMessage and FaceTime are protected by end-to-end encryption so no one but the sender and receiver can see or read them. Apple cannot decrypt that data.
conversations which take place over iMessage and FaceTime are protected by end-to-end encryption so no one but the sender and receiver can see or read them. Apple cannot decrypt that data. Only the NSA can.
Bundling bags. They solve all manner of problems.
Quite aside from the other purchase stoppers, I have a projection system, and the Kinect simply doesn't work in that environment -- I know this -- we tried it. It's blinded by the projector just to start, and when you stand where it can see your outline blocking the projector, you're an annoying shadow on the display anyway. Complete non-starter. We threw our Kinect in a box and never took it out again.
I can vouch for this.
Reading old Python? Easy. Reading old C? Easy. Even reading old C++? Not too bad.
But... reading old Perl after a break from the language? I need to go re-learn the language, find out what all the obscure special variables do, do a complete refresh on regular expressions (remember when that was how people routinely parsed text? omg/lol), re-learn the broken parts (like, no 2D or higher arrays) and how the work-arounds look, and that only *preps* you to read the old code... it's still like slogging uphill in molasses.
I give Perl credit where it's due: It's pretty fast for a scripting language. Back when I wrote in it, knowing a lot less, and pre-Python, it did seem like the best choice. That was the mid- to late-90's.
But I would *never* use it again. Right now, for scripting, Python (2-series) is the choice I'd make, I'm utterly comfortable in it, it's totally easy, almost transparent to read, or at least the way I write it, it is, it's powerful as heck and it is also very fast, the exception mechanisms allow really solid, dependable code to be written in a very, to me, intuitive manner. Database interface is a doddle, in fact pretty much any common task is a doddle. Just a great language all around.
I do keep one snippet of perl code around: The code that lets me call an external Python procedure, so that when old Perl needs attention, if it isn't time-critical, it can get it by replacement. A huge time saver, many times over.
Otherwise, C or C++, depending on what the task is. I can read my old c code easily; I was always very conservative and consistent about bracing, tabbing, and so on, and I'm a liberal commenter, so generally the code is well explained too. Other people's code does throw me though... all you have to do is throw K&R style formatting in there and I immediately lose track of the brace levels, and it goes downhill from there. Luckily, I'm not in a position where I have to deal with anyone else's code except those who work for me, and therefore do it my way anyhow.
Honestly guys, would you all feel comfortable attending with a bunch of bros in banana hammocks?
Yes, perfectly comfortable. With or without my SO, who is most definitely a lady. She'd be fine with it too. Nothing offensive about men's bodies for me; they don't trip my trigger sexually, but they certainly don't bother me. Next question?
Good grief, are you ever bewildered. The dictionary definition of misogyny is hatred of women. Feminism is not the "notion that women are people"; it is the advancement of women to rights parity with men, something that badly needed doing, more so in the past, but still not fully addressed. Radical feminism brews sexuality into the whole thing in a pathological fashion, sundering gender identity, creating completely uncalled for barriers to social interaction, unasked for and unneeded, but forced, "protection" of women who don't buy into their worldview (that's what we call repression, son), and worse.
PS - You have NO idea what my relationship with women is. The idea that you, as confused as you are, think you can call such insights out is nothing short of hilarious. I"m not even sure you know what the word "people" means. Protip: It doesn't mean that they are who you expect them to be.
Not only that, but the new Mac Pro is probably the most original desktop computer design since.. desktop computers were invented.
Look, I *own* a Mac Pro. It's a great machine. The new one... it's neither innovative or great.
A machine that requires external expansion? Not new since Sinclair ZX-80 (or probably earlier.) A high power design that uses a vertical cooling tower? Audio's been doing this forever; all kinds of actually innovative cooling designs can be found in the history of audio power amplifiers. Tunnels, polygons, forced air, liquid, even semiconductor. Odd physical configuration? Tons of 'em out there. Raspberry pi. Mini ITX. or this. The new Mac Pro has a new CPU in it, as does virtually every iteration of these machines; it has a flash boot drive, like a lot of computers; and you're gonna have to spend a lot more money to make a worthwhile computer out of it... like a ZX-80. It's also likely to be very, very expensive. You know what that spells? "Not Buying"
But hey. You can always by a Mac Mini or an iMac. Those, at least, are working multicore computers out of the box. Or, I hasten to add, the current generation Mac Pro, which is a great machine.
It's even older than that. Sinclair ZX-80. Out of the box, basically neutered - 1k. Expansion port + devices (like RAM) and suddenly you could do stuff. And you know what people often did with it? Took it out of the stock case and moved it into one where they could add more stuff.
Apple's new Mac Pro... the very best idea I've heard of so far is a case that the new Mac Pro would load right into, in which the drive bays and video conversion connectors to standard video tech would be placed. Bingo... you get the horsepower of the machine, the clean design of a proper all in one system, the physical and vibrational security of enclosed drives, single power supply, perhaps even a PCI chassis. And best of all? You don't have a stupid trashcan on your desk.
Of course, if they price that trashcan where I expect them to, that's the end of that.
Yet if you ask people around what they think of prostitution, they'll think it's disgusting and that those women are whores.
For some values of "people", yes. For this person, no -- on both counts. Society at large is pretty dysfunctional when it comes to these issues. That's why such confusion about sexuality in general, paid or not, reigns in the minds of many.
There's a truism that always rises to the top when women claim such behavior is "beneath" them, and that they'll not engage in sexual behavior until married, etc. We've already established that you're trading for your sexual favors; what we're arguing about now is simply the price. When men argue about it on a woman's behalf... same answer, really.
Pretty much everything is a trade. To suddenly draw a line and say that *this* can't be traded for *that* in the face of an informed adult's choice to do so? That's just being retarded.
Would you say the same if this was about racism
Of course not. Racism is about hatred for inherent qualities. Appreciating a sexy person isn't. You're utterly bewildered.
do you think misogyny should be more widely accepted
Mr. Hanky... I hate to be the one to break it to you, but those of us who admire the sexual presence, poise and potential of women in general don't hate women.
To suggest that we do... that's not very insightful, fella.
I will say that the nonsense spewed by those of you who think that the joyous and interested participation in the roles of the sexes should be categorized as misogyny -- the hatred of women -- should be a lot less widely accepted.
Most at 30 are just smart enough to act otherwise.
Most at 30 are just smart enough to pretend otherwise to avoid arousing politically correct morons.
It's a perfect match. Tweaking the libido is entertainment. Games are entertainment. The age group here is largely young adult, sexually aware.
So, several things. First, the idea that the female psyche isn't tweaked by up front sexuality? That's dead at the door. It's a social thing right now to pretend that sexuality is "mommy magic" and shouldn't be in play, but that is, and has been for decades, just a toxic result of radical women's lib propaganda. Now that is not saying that women shouldn't have equal opportunity in jobs, salary, medical care, marriage, etc -- not at all. Equal opportunity in matters that are not themselves tied to one's sexuality is good (I don't need equal access to an obstetrician, women don't need equal access to a dick doctor. Few will hire a fellow to strip for other fellows, likewise few would hire women to strip for other women. Etc.) But it is saying that the sexes are different, and that's a good thing, and an interesting thing, and altogether something to be celebrated, elevated, emphasized and above all enjoyed.
Next, and standing all by itself, there's *nothing* wrong with marketing one's natural advantages. We do it with minds that are able to wrap around programming and engineering. Athletes do it with bodies that are able to excel under the stresses of sports, pro and amateur. Actors and models do it with looks that please the audience. And so on, ad infinitum. What's absolutely disgusting is when some idiot steps in and decides that some characteristic, sensuality and looks being perfect examples, isn't "appropriate" for someone to use, either personally, or by employing a third party to "bring" it.
Do people with natural advantages have an easier time going down various roads in life? Yes, they do. Do we have *any* right to say that they should not, or cannot, use those advantages to travel those roads? No, we don't -- there's nowhere to derive such a right from.
Here's an important tip on the term "liberation": When you find yourself saying "sure, you can choose to do that if you like", most probably, you're engaged in something along the lines of liberation. However, when you find yourself saying "you can't do that", you really need to look hard at what you're saying because most likely, what you're engaged in is repression, probably direct and senseless repression at that.
If there's something to question about the marketing here, it might be raised as, "Where are the handsome guys as marketing tweaks for the ladies"? If the buying audience is truly equally distributed between the sexes, then if the game companies have any sense (debatable, where's my new MechAssault?) then they'll hit the women in the same nerve centers. You think they don't enjoy interacting with hunky guys? Oh, silly, silly you.
And of course, if good looking people, highly sexual people, or people with moles offend ye, then avoid them, by all means. Just don't tell the rest of us what it is we can, should, or will enjoy.
I raise my glass to those who make personal, informed choices.
I raise my middle finger to those who would interfere with them.
Now, let the politically correct bunk commence.
Nor have they said, as yet, anywhere, "The new mac pro can drive up to six 2k displays"
You would think, given that very few people have 4k displays, and very few are interested in such, and even fewer could afford them even if they *are* interested, that they might have mentioned normal monitor capabilities.
Now, you may be perfectly correct in your assertion, what I am telling you is that Apple hasn't said *anything* that backs you up as yet. If they do, then we're down to the firewire brick problem. If they don't, then it's a 3-monitor white elephant of absolutely no interest.