The problem is that GCC will always give you a different binary every time you compile from the same source.
I tried compiling "Hello World" using GCC 4.4.3 and then building it again five minutes later. The executables were binary identical. Is what you said only for non-trivial cases such as "Hello World"?
Which, I have to admit, I'm not entirely sure that you are debating anything to the heart of the matter, but
I think you're going a little personal on someone's flippant slippery slope comment. No one ever said stop judging, but a real think about statutes need to come into play rather your gut-feeling/Miller Test.
If you want to post in generalities, then I guess, yeah, you admit that hate speech laws will be used to censor. One man's cheeky Mohammad cartoon is another man's hate speech/blasphemy.
Just because people speak in proverbs or or logical fallacies doesn't mean that they don't happen. Please elaborate how, since the ratification of the US Constitution, speech freedoms are greater today.
If you do not believe that once given more control (laws), then one party (government) will not seek more control. Well, I see your logic, but you should bone-up on more history and less philosophy.
i can tell the difference between homosexuality and necrophilia. i can tell the difference between marijuana and meth. and i can tell the difference between political speech and hate speech
the slippery slope is an idea that only works in a world where nobody can think and identify different topics. therefore, the slippery slope never works as a persuasive argument
Your argument seems to assume that we can all argree on objective definitions of sexuality, drugs, and speech. Differences in drugs can be objectively determined. Sexuality I'll give you as well. Can you honestly say we all agree on what is hate speech? If not, then yes, hate speech laws can, and most likely will be, abused to censor one party. It may not be a slippery slope, but the infringement of rights will occur.
There is a fine, but important distinction you need to state in your case against using the slippery slope.
the slippery slope is an idea that only works in a world where nobody can objectively and uniformly identify different classes.
The slippery slope argument is, by nature, not logical, but if you're going to take the time to dissect a piece of rhetoric, then get it right.
I demand satisfaction!
I would say they will just have to suck it up and pay up for borrowing ideas.
Pay up for borrowing ideas. I understand the patent system, but you should really hear yourself speak.
If anything he's a plant from their side, imo.
MacDailyNews is over that way...
I work in a team of 7. We're a mixed bag of software, hardware, and systems engineering types, but we all have to do some programming as our primary function. When a team member leaves, the replacement gets all the lovely FNG assignments as their secondary role. That is, documentation, testing, and/or QA.
I got shoved into software QA when I arrived on the team. I joke about how I hate it and how my teammates hate me in that role, but I secretly relish it and my team mates know it has to be done.
Ask yourself these questions:
- Do you love processes?
- Do you find code reviews interesting?
- Do you like tearing into others' designs and implementation?
- Does it really jack your nads when the documentation doesn't jive with the implementation?
- Do you like audits?
- Do you like meetings?
- Do you like ISO 9001?
- Don't you just hate having to reverse-engineer a product because someone was lazy with the documentation?
- Do you like making/maintaining support tools?
Then Software QA is the move for you!
It is also a skill you can shop around regardless of the development environment (although some environments lend themselves to QA better than others).
Link to Original Source