But when I say the US has many communist highlights in its long grey hair, I get downvoted.
It's as if Obama was never indoctrinated by Communist Frank Marshall Davis (who was under FBI investigation for we don't know what) and learned to hate white people, capitalism, self-made people, small-business owners... or as Obama would surely call them, the proletariat.
> The price drop is a price drop. I don't think we can add too much useful commentary to it.
Yes we can. I have to be pedantic here. Those numbers are not prices. I don't even have to enumerate the several financial experts that have come out in the past few weeks admitting all markets are rigged including Stock, Precious Metals and especially the Bonds market.
Prices? What prices? There are no prices. A price is a signal. There are no signals any more. Don't make the expensive mistake of confusing those numbers for prices!
Can you explain how it works? Wasn't there a company trying to make streamable games but then lag was an issue? Does Playstation 4 render PS3 games on their servers and send me the images... or what?
On the other hand it's a working piece of software, it serves a purpose, there's demand for it, etc etc...
In my opinion you're being way too harsh on yourself. What you said basically amounts to "it's too simple, I used a library, I cannot guarantee it won't ever crash".
Congrats on the first of those three, and welcome to the club with regards to the last two.
Which is a shame because this ghost train story isn't as interesting as the real fake jobs story going on in the UK right now (real people working fake jobs).
But perhaps the BBC doesn't want to cover that story for some reason.
- conflates "vulnerability" with "attackability" for profit
- thinks by breaking people's products they are helping fix them
- does not know the meaning of phrases such as "practical" and "real-world"
Security experts are snake oil peddlers.
They sell tougher doors so thieves can't knock them down, while the government furnishes thieves with universal jigglers/lockpickers.
The first security expert will be the person that stops the government from putting backdoors everywhere. They won't do that because to them, government backdoors are not a problem. Only your vulnerabilities, which do not prove a service can actually be attacked, are a problem in their eyes.
Which is why they charge you by the hour while working for the government implementing the backdoors that they use to scare you into paying them their high consultancy fees.
I'm a programmer who started with VB6 on Windows 98 and now I don't even own a partition with Windows installed.
When I programmed VB6 I used to go to Planet Source Code (a website) to see what others had done. There was a lot of beginner code samples being posted which helped newbies like me at the time to learn the ropes. Then there were also a few gems from which I learned a lot over a few weeks of studying the same code base.
Despite my going back there to see what the community was doing, I never thought of PSC as a place where I can find functions I'm missing. I always used the MSDN library for that (it was incredibly helpful with nice examples). In other words, my mental model was: there's VB6 which comes with all functions I'll ever need (it could call any Win32 API function) and then there's PSC where I go hang out with other people that also code VB6 who want to show or share or teach something to the community.
Fast-forward to today - the main language I use at work is Ruby, and it is emblematic of the traits shared by all open-source languages: they do not come with "all functions", in fact most core functions (or what I would consider "core") have been delegated to libraries ("gems" as Ruby calls them). The difference is that my mental model of open-source languages is that they come with barebones functionality and expect the community to contribute with core functions, to the point where basic functionality like HTTP requests have several different libraries modeling the same behavior.
Even though I work solely in open-source languages nowadays, I miss the times where as a programmer I could expect my programming language to be self-sufficient in terms of its environment and its functions. A language should bring as many pre-made functions as possible, and guarantee that they work as expected and amongst each other. I should not be expected to rely on unpaid workers for core functionality, documentation, tooling, etc.
It is a spectrum. On one end (let's call this side "left") you have Small Scheme and Forth and other barebones languages; on the other end (the "right" side of the spectrum) you have giants like SAP and TIBCO. I'd say Ruby leans to the left and VB6 leaned to the right. I'd also pay very good money for a modern, individual-programmer oriented TIBCO-like environment.
EU is to Romanians what US is to Latinos, and what industrial countries in general are to Africa: an elite that is currently sustained through the exploitation of and exportation of problems to their counterparts.
Most mainstream material that is presented to the public, even through schools and particularly through the media, is fluff. For instance in History, the pyramids were not built by slaves, Germany won the Great War in 1916 but the Entente did not accept a peace agreement, the Civil War wasn't about slavery at all, Hamilton borrowed from the French to start the national debt on purpose, etc.
I agree with you. If this were a thread machine it would be insane, and you would probably be able to make t-shirts from pictures easily with it. Not so with a Band Screen.
"Leftist" simply means someone on the left side of the political spectrum that goes from Totalitarianism all the way to Free Markets. The reason I say "leftist" is because if I say "democrats" or "liberals" I will be excluding a lot of people; and I'll be talking about US politics. Whereas when I say "leftist" I mean anyone in the world that leans towards centralization of power over free markets without intervention form constituencies.
I have an issue with anyone that wants to change my life via the power of voting, or thinks that is acceptable behavior. I am a non-interventionist when it comes to all relationships, be they between two countries, two people, two companies, a company and a person, etc.
If you think it's OK to allow a third party with a monopoly on violence to whimsically change what you are allowed to do in your private affairs and relationships, then I honestly think you have not read enough cases of people being wrongly convicted.
You're blind because you're an r-selected leftist with a tiny amygdala and hence barely any capacity to recognize a threat in the making. (This is just my hypothesis, don't take it seriously)
Put the pieces together. She's a woman. She confuses differences in personal productivity for "fairness and justice" (clear mark of a leftist). She tweets a story larger than 140 characters (low IQ, as most leftists). She acts naively as if protection from the law will protect her from companies with lawyers (leftist delusion).
Don't beat yourself up about not seeing the threat. r/K selection strategy basically breeds two different species of people. I can't imagine what it must be like to be like you and not see that communism is taking over through Cultural Marxism, either.
> The term "Social Justice Warrior" is often used to dismiss people who argue against discrimination in various arenas. If you want to be taken seriously in discussions about discrimination, then perhaps avoid it.
Is that the principle? I'll prove to you you're a leftist hypocrite.
'The term "misogynist" is often used to dismiss people who argue against the idea that feminists work for equality'
And yet leftists are the biggest offenders of this principle. They are the first to call people misogynists, anti-semites, homophobic, etc. Those are pure ad-hominem that the leftist never cares to correct; until they THINK they found something like that being done by the other side. Except, dear scott_s, that SJW is NOT name calling. It is accurate labeling. Just like saying leftist isn't name calling. We just don't want to talk ad infinitum about your flavor of democracy - it's wrong in principle (mob rule). An SJW is a person that has internalized key teachings of the Frankfurt School and other Cultural Marxist doctrines through the current education system and the media. That's all. And it shows, in you, in the girl tweeting about Google salary spreadsheets, and every other leftist. It shows.
And on top of that, our borders to the South are open which means terrorists could come in from Mexico as well.
However, despite the TSA being admittedly just security theater and the US borders being wide open there hasn't been another terrorist attack ever since the 9/11 false flag.
But you and your leftist comrades are still shouting "The terrorists are out to get me!!".
I really, honestly, personally think that you are the idiot here, not those rightfully raising the SJW flag right after an SJW almost sinked Reddit.
If Myth Busters tested some wacky car on a public road at 70mph without telling anyone, we'd all be freaking out.
But because they were "researchers" (i.e. the same tribe as most leftist people here) from a university (leftist church) then they get a pass and all sorts of justification for why what they did was OK.
EDIT: Leftists go by label. They will heart any "researcher" thinking they must be their peer in their religion. They're not the sort of people that do some research before forming an opinion.
EDIT 2: There's no irony because most people defending the researchers are indeed leftists. This is like saying that there would be irony if I mistakenly thought that a politician said something (and hence argued based on that false knowledge that leftists attach themselves to politicians too quickly) when in fact it wasn't a politician but a celebrity. The point is, leftists defend people not on principles but based on how close they think they are to them - and reading "researchers" dings the "good people" bell in the leftist brain.
EDIT 3: The real irony here is that when free marketers say NASA should be shut down, leftists complain there's no way a private company can fund research, and here we are with leftists trying to shame me for mistakenly thinking a researcher was working for public money, when in fact I'm wrong and these researchers are actually the kind of researcher that leftists say can never exist: private researchers. Amazing. Do you at least now understand why NASA is a waste of taxpayer money (I don't care if it's 70c per person) or is the next excuse going to be that rockets are more expensive than cars?
You seem to be asking whether epigenetic traits are inheritable. It will take a while for the scientific community to fully accept this since it smells of Lamarckism, but if we do not accept transgenerational epigenetic transmission it gets really hard to explain things like this: http://phenomena.nationalgeographic.com/2013/12/01/mice-inhe...
It's as if Obama was never indoctrinated by Communist Frank Marshall Davis (who was under FBI investigation for we don't know what) and learned to hate white people, capitalism, self-made people, small-business owners... or as Obama would surely call them, the proletariat.
Crazy times.