So how do I give them what doesn't exist?
Create it, and then it will exist.
So how do I give them what doesn't exist?
Create it, and then it will exist.
I now work in a low paid part-time job, and while I have no money and no retirement plan, at least I can spend most of my time on projects that interest me.
You damned fool!!
All you have to do, is work long, hard hours doing boring things for lots of money. Do this long enough, and then eventually you'll be able to retire. Then you'll finally have the time to spend on projects that interest you, with all that creative energy that old people are so well known for having.
But noooo, you're doomed such that when you turn 72, you won't be able to afford retirement. You'll have nothing, except memories of a life wasted on things you enjoy, instead of being spent on responsibly preparing for your future (assuming you win the cointoss of fate, which reaps about half the population before retirement age).
..most of the projects I work on the requirements get written after the software is complete. Sadly I'm not kidding about that..
Look at mister fancy-pants formal development process here, where requirements eventually get written. Braggart!
Did a libertarian straw man kill your parents or something?
That would be be insightful if it hadn't killed about 20-thousand Chilean's parents...
Which libertarian did that? Was that the libertarian who took signed the order to take USA off the gold standard, or was it the libertarian who was called "The Imperial President" because of his assertion of limitless power, culminating in thinking he was truly above the law? Was it the libertarian who started the Drug War as we know it, or was it the libertarian who so sickened Americans that they literally formed a big-L Libertarian Party during his administration in order to try to Do Something about him and his kind?
Please define "enshrined"
The property of being placed within a shrine, such as when a thing is placed within a display (a shrine) at the National Archives.
Also, figuratively: almost all Americans know what the document says (basically, if not all the details of the grievances with the king) and its first sentence in particular is well-known as an explanation, from an American perspective, as to how (and why) people can legitimately form a new government. If an American ever writes another document with that document's purpose, it's highly likely they'll borrow some of the form of that one, and maybe even some verbatim phrases if the writer is smart. It is an excellent model, and this opinion (I think) is shared by a majority of Americans. Thus, figuratively enshrined. It has a special place in our hearts. Brainwashing
the declaration of independence isn't a legally binding document within the scope of US law.
The document was intended to be illegal yet (not perversely!) legitimate document within British law. Talking about it within US law doesn't even make sense. It's part of the country, but not really part of the government; it might best help to think of it as the government's "mother" or something like that. You don't have to do what mom says, but you can't really deny her importance.
Schools should teach all pupils to be able to spot fallacies, and encourage them to castigate those who use them.
Detecting fallacies is fine, but castigation presumes a certain value judgement. Get out of my safe space with your obvious pro-truth bias!
Facebook is not your neighbor's house. I totally don't understand how anyone can see it as even faintly analogous to that. I'm serious. This is 2+2=5 territory to me.
it's natural to expect privacy.
It's natural to some of us. It's apparently not natural to some other people, which is why they broadcast their stuff to the Internet.
If you're fucking your wife in your bedroom, you expect privacy. If you're fucking her in the town square, while occasionally making eye contract with strangers and saying, "hey, check out what we're doing," then that suggests that you don't expect privacy.
I think the better rhetorical question is: why are some people so amazingly stupid, that they are incapable of telling the difference between these two scenarios? What is causing this stupidity? Is there anything we can do about it, and if there is, should we do it?
The real problem for the facebook posters is that on the internet, human culture doesn't apply, and they have yet to come to terms with that.
No, the problem is that some users don't know the difference between fucking in the town square (uploading to facebook) vs their bedrooms (sending encrypted email).
But getting it into English is the hard part! "Easy if the design work is good?" No shit, everything is easy once someone has already done 95% of the work.
Writing code is a tiny portion of being a programmer(/analyst). I still, to date, have not heard even second-hand, of any system which goes through the agonizing process of tricking users/bosses into revealing their requirements.
You just admitted that your code writes code that meets specifications. As if specifications are a thing which exist in real life!!
Here is how most software is made. Create a program, or otherwise acquire the source to some program which appears to be somewhat topically related to the program someone said they want. Debug it, for obvious ways where tests appear to not meet some specs that the programmer completely imagines in his fantasy world. Deploy to production. Find out a requirement. Change the program as quickly as possible, as a panic-filled emergency since people are already using the program and it needs to be fixed yesterday. Find out another requirement, reported as a bug. Change the program. Meet with users. Trick, threaten or bargain with them, getting them to reveal more requirements. Change the program. Learn more requirements over the years. When you think you know about half the requirements, start to think about how the program should be designed. Fantasize about what version 2.0 would be like, as if there's ever going to be a 2.0.
Can your code generator do all that?
If you compare legitimately you find that adding a solar deployment typically takes about 3 people.
Your home-made PV panels manufactured by 3 people, aren't nearly as efficient as the factory-made ones that you can buy. The ones you buy had to be made by a lot of other people (far more than merely 3) but they are way better. Just make sure you don't compare your 3-person-manufactured panel's cost, with the factory-manufactured panel's energy output, or you'll accidentally misrepresent the tech's overall effectiveness.
Comparing installation labour to running labour is fallacious at best.
You're right. The key is to "simply"(*) add them. The best analysis is going to comprehensively compare total man-seconds for solar to total man-seconds for coal (or nuclear, wind, etc).
(*) Some people might say that man-seconds sometimes don't compare to one another (e.g. skilled vs unskilled labor) but education itself contains many man-seconds of effort within it. This is getting to be a damn complicated spreadsheet...
Yes, that's what they're saying. This story is about how solar isn't competitive yet.
Ultimately, the cost of any commodity is derived from it having used up peoples' time. The more jobs something requires, the more expensive it will generally be. When solar can get its total jobs per kWh to below coal's, it will finally be winning. But apparently that's still a long way off.
I can imagine Facebook, Twitter etc. blowing up over this.
Me too, except "blowing up" in the sense of suddenly having lots of new account signups. I imagine a desk at airports, with public computer everyone uses to sign up for accounts on these websites, in order to have a password to hand over.
"Uh, yeah, my account is email@example.com. My password is 12345."
how can they use ANYTHING they find as evidence of anything?
This isn't for purposes of finding evidence. It's for theater. Someone got the idea that American voters want visitors to be humiliated and insulted, and this is their idea for how to best do it.
How the idea of anal pattern photographs got shot down, I have no idea. Cowards!!
CEOs? How about everybody? Am I really the only person who "shops around" and tends to favor lower prices?
One of the reasons I'm pro-free-market, is that I like cheap, affordable stuff. I'm happy to buy local (and on average it ought to be cheaper, since transportation isn't free), but I'm not willing to sacrifice much for it. Any time you people try to force everyone to buy more expensive shit, you create create black markets, externalized costs, lower quality, etc.
(And perversely, people are willing to make a few sacrifices for black markets. Something about sticking it to The Man...)
[asshole alert: I am making fun of your simple, understandable brainfart.]
Intel could not and did not want to provide the mobile PowerPCs in quantities Apple demanded and did not really put R&D into mobile PowerPCs.
Yeah, last I heard, Intel still hasn't produced their first one. Somewhere along the way, they got all distracted by their existing and future x86 products.
It seems like this incompetence and lack of commitment has infected all sorts of industries. Ford still can't deliver enough Accords and Camrys, people have been waiting forever for Porsche's Camero (I think they're having supply trouble with the Rich Corinthian Leather), and when I asked for a Big Mac at Burger King, they rang up the wrong burger.
"There is nothing new under the sun, but there are lots of old things we don't know yet." -Ambrose Bierce