Aw crap, Slashdot killed the joke. There was supposed to be an embedded "nc" command in that hostname.

There's lots more information at my site http://dsfnjsaxshnc-lmachine7.... ...

Also they shouldn't use these silly "C" compiler thingies, instead they should use a couple of wires to short circuit a PCB until the program is in memory!

I think using a game engine is perfectly acceptable in 2015. I don't think we're going to get an avalance of original game ideas if we force everyone who has a great idea for something to learn OpenGL and DirectX.

It's worst than that. Lobbyists actually write most bills, then find a congresscritter to sponsor the lobbyists' pet bills. Congresscritters very rarely write legislation themselves (I don't have it to hand but I recall seeing a stat that put their share at something like 5%.)

I lived on fixed wireless for most of the past decade. It was down at least 10% of the time, and often more (like every time it rained). It was unreliable enough that I kept the dialup modem as a backup.

If good upload speeds were widely available, I suspect online backup would quickly become a mainstream market, especially as more people become aware of the need to back up (witness the solid market for flash drives and external hard drives, mostly to ordinary folks and largely used for personal backups).

I know I'd use it, but my paltry 600k up will not cut it.

There really was an argument, I was there, I heard people get very angry about it. You can dismiss them as neckbeards, but the two major users of (IBM/Clone) PCs at that time were business users and computer enthusiasts of all ages, and both were hesitant to use WIMP interfaces.

The PC1512, that I mentioned, wasn't wonderful (6MHz 8086 IIRC, which while better than 4.77MHz 8088 was still hardly a speed demon), but GEM on it was smooth, more or less an equal to the Atari ST in performance. But few people touched GEM. The feeling was that GEM was easy to use but it was getting in the way.

What happened in 1990 wasn't that computers got cheap enough to tolerably run a GUI OS. Macs, Amigas, Atari STs, and GEM-running PCs predate 1990 considerably. What happened was that in 1990 IBM PC clones became available that tolerably ran a multitasking WIMP OS.

The Founders had largely expected common sense to prevail. That it didn't is one reason why we have the Bill of Rights.

Why is this rated 5? Yes, paying drivers more *might* slightly increase supply but my guess is that the number of drivers is somewhat

You guess? Well lets just throw out the Iron Clad Law of Supply & Demand, on which almost all of the worlds productive economy is based, because you guess.

fixed so without also charging passengers more you do nothing on the demand side. The point of demand pricing is to reduce demand
so that you don't overwhelm the relatively fixed supply. If your goal is to always have cars available, then increasing the price while
paying the drivers the same would actually be a better solution than increasing the pay while charging the same but that would also be
idiotic.
You cannot look at one side of the equation.

When demand is up, there are only two options. Option number one is shortages (of supply). Option number two is that supply must increase.
When supply is down, there are only two options. Option number one is shortages (of demand). Option number two is that supply must decrease.

In either case, the solution is price elasticity. When the price drops, because supply is too high or demand is too low, drivers will drop out of the market. When the price raises, because supply is too low or demand is too high, drivers will enter the market.

Uber has a flexible work force, and it is no way fixed. They also posses 100% more information about the market and their drivers than you do, or the AG does.

This is the case of government using consumer protection laws in a way that will hurt consumers. Economics and the market are not friendly, but they do produce desirable outcomes. If the desirable outcome is fairness, than what the government and AG are doing will produce a fair outcome - everyone regardless of ability to pay will have an equal chance of getting or not getting a car, based on random luck, your skin color, or whatever else motivates you.

If the outcome is to provide as many rides possible, this requires a market with supply and demand efficiency. By curbing supply efficiency by limiting price elasticity, you provide fewer rides than the market will optimally support. If you are frequent driver, you know that by going to where the demand is, to when the demand is, will produce more and more profitable rides. If you are a rider, you know that by relying on Uber during exceptionally busy times, you will only be able to get a ride by paying far more than you would otherwise.

This is really a great case of the nanny government stepping into a situation which is drastically over it's head, in the name of "fairness". Fairness is not an economic goal, it's a social goal, and it's stupid to try to enforce a social goal like this on the very tail end of the policy stack.

Firefox is just as bad though, why do they make it so hard to open your bookmarks?

Unfortunately they don't. I know this because it's Ctrl-B, which means you bring it up around 20% of the time you try to paste anything into a dialog, because B is right next to V.

It's like the screenshot and debug report "features" Android has. I don't even know how to trigger either of those. All I know is that something I commonly do is that trigger. I have a directory full of unwanted screenshots to prove it.

My boss was complaining about how he couldn't get some kindle book for work to be billed to his company card. The only options that come up for kindle books look to be to give it as a gift to someone else, use a gift card to buy it, or to buy it with 1 click which charges it straight to the card you have on file. I pointed out he just needed to change the 1 click card to the company card, buy it, then change the card back, but that was "too much work" (a man after me own heart).

"To be a great programmer, you need to write code that reads like English."

That's an interesting observation, and see what I (not a coder but an interested bystander) say above about two programs I know equally well as a user -- one in Pascal (I can pretty much grok what all the code does despite zero comments), the other in C (lots of comments, but still makes my brain hurt even when I can figure it out).

From the user standpoint (I'm not a programmer, but I take an interest, and have rooted around a bit in various source codes), these are my observations:

1) When a program written in C crashes, it may do damnear anything on its way out.

When a program written in Pascal/Delphi crashes, it simply closes down and returns you to the OS.

2) I have an ancient (1990) database program I can't live without. When it was retired from the market, its owner kindly shared source with me, which happened to be in Pascal. There's not a single comment in it, but as I know the program so well, I can tell what nearly all its code does.

I can't say that of the other antique program which I still use and know very well (and have perused much of the source), but is written in C.

I doubt it's entirely coincidence, or even relative marketshare, that's given us those marvelous Obfuscated and Underhanded Code contests for C, but no such for Pascal.

You want <ecode>:

if (x<5) {
  printf("Works for me!\n");
}