Comment Re:Barry (Score 2) 132
And if he's trying to "pare" it, a small, sharp knife would probably work better.
And if he's trying to "pare" it, a small, sharp knife would probably work better.
I was just reading this comment on another social site:
"Any statement that starts with "No one would be stupid enough to..." is false."
There are, or at least were, many applications that were useful and on Windows, but not available on Linux or BSD. Switching off of those can be a significant cost. But if you change the underlying system, those probably won't be available anyway.
Amazon: "That makes absolutely no sense. That would lose us money, not make us money."
The core is a LONG way from the surface. Volcanoes aren't. The mantle plumes move slowly.
OTOH, we've known that the magnetic poles were getting ready to switch for decades now. We don't know when or why or how long it will take. This is probably related to that, but we don't have any really good models.
Unfortunately, when they are separated like that each half becomes nearly useless. They need to be merged, though with clear demarcations so you can skip a part that isn't currently relevant.
I think a giant context is not going to be the answer. It's just got too many problems. Better will probably be parsing the context into connected pieces, and at a different level assembling the "lemmas" into "theorums". (Yeah, those aren't quite the right words, but I'm not sure the right words exist, and that's the analogy from math proofs. Code library isn't the right concept as the "lemma" will often be quite specific to the current task.)
But 1st and 2nd grades???
Sorry, but that sounds like a REALLY bad idea. More than half of what those grades should be about is learning to operate well in groups.
You mean like XML does?
Your mistake is thinking of "the government" as a unitary entity. Different parts of it want different things.
Well, the use case is clearly to produce binaries with smaller memory footprint. But *I* didn't even notice that Debian had disabled it.
FWIW, if they want to class insecticides as "toxins", I think they're probably right. Also plasticizers. And likely a few other industrial chemicals that aren't properly cleaned up.
Well, a baseball bat *is* a deadly weapon, if used as a weapon.
OTOH, when arguing about whether it's a bomb the definitions of the terms are less clear. And when arguing about whether it's an explosion, high energy chemists/engineers will have a different definition than folks who don't deal with the details.
To me, it's an explosion. If some professional wants to say "No, it's a deflagration." I'm not going to say he's wrong, but I'm not wrong either. We're just speaking different dialects of English.
Well, that would strongly reduce future harm...but no the harm they've already done.
The primary function of the design engineer is to make things difficult for the fabricator and impossible for the serviceman.