Re: “I have wide balls ”
Yeah, right, Senator Craig, that's why you have such a wide stance.
194 posts • joined 12 Jun 2012
And that (among other reasons) is why you need to be able to nest subroutines: Declare functions and procedures within each other.
The only class of languages I am certain you are able to do that in are the Pascal-descendant ones.
You want to run on regular diesel fuel the last bit of the previous drive precisely in order to facilitate starting the next time: Have the pipes from tank through fuel pump, injection pump, high-pressure lines and injector nozzles all filled up with the regular stuff, so you won't have to expel the canola oil and saturate the whole pipeline with filling-station stuff while grinding on the starter motor. I'd guess.
DavCrav:...we could, if you wish, call it all NI.
katrinab:If my employer only deducted NI, I wouldn't get any deduction at all from my Irish tax bill
Yes you would, if that "NI" was as much as the total you paid before. Which is what DavCrav suggested.
You'd only get a heck of a lot of NI booked in Ireland.
... about “music fidelity”? Even the cheapest shit headphones or earbuds are good enough to hear what's going on. The problem with listening to music isn't sound quality; it's that the sheeple do it ALL THE TIME, in an effort to drown out the silence between their ears — in order not to have to think, and not to notice that they aren't.
There, now you know; you're welcome. You can now go back to your regularly scheduled 24/7 muzak (on your 800£ over-ear headphones with the gold-plated lead), so that... Well, you know. Now.
AFAICT, the Unix software on the tapes in circulation back then -- which, if I understand correctly, *BSD is ultimately based on -- wasn't LEGAL "Open Source", but basically pirated AT&T property.
1: At least not unambiguously.
2: Or "Free Software", if you will.
"He had a bad idea about underage sex. People argued the point with him and he changed his mind. This is commendable."
He had had this stuff pointed out to him for decades, and if I understood correctly only came out with a mealy-mouthed statement within the last week. Conversions under the gallows aren't particularly convincing.
Or, if I'm misremembering and it was earlier -- I have a vague visual memory of the timestamp on that post I saw flickering by in some stream; I think it was a few days ago, or was it the corresponding date in 2016? -- then it doesn't logically square with him defending Minsky the way he did now.
1) The GPL prevents taking stuff un-free; the BSD/MIT/etc licenses allow it. If I emancipate my slave with a notarized affidavit to the effect that "this is a free man, he is not to be enslaved" I've set him free; if I tell him to go out in the world and then put up a poster saying that he's free for the taking I've set him loose. The BSD/MIT/etc licenses are looser than the GPL, but arguably not freer.
2) Yeah, if you have such problems with Microsoft (et al) EULAs that you refuse to abide by them, then you'd be in breach of the license terms if you used the software the way you want to (i.e, not abiding by whatever license term it is you've got a bug in your bonnet about), so don't do that.
3) I'm critical of most EULAs (or at least used to be more so), but abide by them. How does that invalidate my voicing of this criticism? (If I could be bothered to any more.)
4) Even if I were to breact the terms of the EULAs, how would that invalidate any other criticism -- NOT related specifically to their EULAs -- of Microsoft/Apple/<insert any topic of choice>?
shutdown -h nowfor a second time: Mag editor fires parting shot at proprietary software
From the article:
[Kosinski] believes that online personalised political messages can be more interesting and relevant than general ones, and the recipients are more competent to judge their quality. It also makes political communication far cheaper because it is highly efficient.They attracted huge followings among groups of people who were misinformed. Deliberately, because just as well as you can use these tools to target recipients who are more competent to judge the quality of your message, you can use them to target recipients who are less competent to do so. That way, you are free to target them with a "less than perfectly truthful" message, and don't need to worry that they'll refuse it. And by targeting these people specifically, you make sure that those who would be more likely to see through it are less likely to ever even see it in the first place, so it won't get debunked as it deserves.
[ . . . ]
And it could allow politicians to reach groups who have previously been ignored and may not have bothered voting as a result. "With both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, they attracted huge followings among groups of people who previously were not politically active," Kosinski says.
That is the nefarious aspect of how this works. And frankly, it baffles me how Kosinski seems to have totally missed that.
As has been revealed since (yes, I know I'm commenting on age-old "news"; just correcting the record), one of the main uses of this technology was to target indecisive voters ( = especially ones possibly leaning Hillary, I'd assume) and just throw so much confusing shit at them that they'd get frustrated with it all and not vote. An old technique, dunno if it was invented or just perfected by the Soviets, getting people to think there just isn't any truth to be had among all the contradictory messaging; perhaps that there is no such thing as "truth" any more.
So no: Fewer votes is not necessarily a sign that the CA-supported campaigning failed; on the contrary, perhaps more of a testament to its effectiveness.
quotes BigSLitleP:Nah. Just clumslily phrased; a few commas might help, but perhaps it should have been ordered some other way. I'll try to illustrate which elements go together:The amount of times i've stopped older members of IT doing something stupid because "we used to do it that way" is a common phrase are too many to count.Although there's no way to know their respective ages, the opinions suggest Tom 7 is the elder. Tom 7's comment is well-phrased and makes sense. BigSLitleP's reply is ungrammatical and incoherent.
The amount of times i've stopped older members of IT doing something stupid [because ["we used to do it that way" is a common phrase]] are too many to count.
But, yeah, supports your hypothesis about their respective ages, AFAICS.
NOTHING has been "proven to be wrong". He's a rapist under Swedish law, and in all probability guilty of inciting crime (i.e, urged Maninng to hack or leak), which is itself also a crime, under US law.
The only thing that has been proven to be wrong is Julian Asshat; he's surely proven himself to be a wrong'un.
No, I'm afraid that isn't how it works; it's ticking down.
Kind of makes sense: If that were the way it worked, the prosecutor would always find some reason to put it on hold, and then you wouldn't, in practice, have any statute of limitations any more.
Nope, he may still have to face Swedish justice.
The statute of limitations has run out on the charges of sexual assault, but the rape charge(s?) can still be re-opened until some time in 2020. The Swedish Crown's Counsel (? "DA", in Yank) can still re-open that. They never closed the case; only put it on ice because with him holed up in the embassy they weren't likely to get anywhere with their investigation. Now they are.
Fortunately, this isn't a court, and colloquially referring to a self-confessed -- just not yet convicted -- committer of the act as what he is on an online forum isn't a crime. Unless and until you're convicted of slander or libel or whatever, which is... Not exceedinglly likely; ISTR Britain is one of those "it being the truth is a valid defense" jurisdictions.
Hitler was never convicted of genocide either -- not by any court, he wasn't. You gonna be vewwy, vewwy careful what you say about him? Nope, you'll go "Are you crazy? He obviously was!" Yes, exactly.
Capitalized "They" in the X-Files-the-Truth(1)-is-out-there style sentence about "that's what they to think".
After a long post of semi-sceptical "conspiratorial" musings, *and a final paragraph of "Or maybe the simple explanation is that he's an asshat".* After all that, this single, *italicized*, ooo-wee-ooo-eee Twilight-Zone sentence.
Grow up; learn to recognize sarcasm without the over-the-top delivery, hashtags, or emoti... Uh, -jis. I totally meant to say emojis. I'm not that old!(2)
1: Yet another capital 'T'.
2: Yes I am.
It's telling that so many of the Anonymous Cowards think (or are trying to make it look as if they actually think) that the reason for the general glee is "for him to be prosecuted for upsetting the Yanks".
I'm a Swede, and as a law-abiding citizen, I'm happy as Hell that the rapey asshat is finally (hopefully) going to be brought to justice for raping at least two women. (Fuck knows how many else he's done it to over the years, and too bad that the sexual assault charges are already past the statute of limitations.)
On a personal level, I'm also satisfied that he'll get his comeuppance for turning WikiLeaks, which could have been a genuine global whistleblowing resource, into first his own personal cult and then a part of the Russian troll-factory operation.
Sure, you might think that's "vindictive", but:
Yeah, that's why they were clamoring to be the first to release the Panama papers... Oh, no, wait -- they actually protested that and tried to paint it as propaganda.
Releasing some hacked documents and doing their best to bury others is what Wikileaks does nowadays. The reason is all in Julian Asshat's twisted little mind.
Some people voluntarily become agents based on greed; others let themselves be used as such because they're stupid enough to do so. In practice, they are agents too, albeit perhaps unwitting ones. The phenomenon didn't begin with Putin; the name "useful idiot" goes back to at least Lenin or Trotsky or some such. The phenomenon itself... I'm betting Julius Caesar was familiar with the idea. And probably Hammurabi too.
I asked that in early 2018 too. Because in 2017 he tweeted that he'd go there if Manning was granted clemency.
Clemency, which means pardon or commutation, was then granted by President Obama in the form of commutation of Manning's sentence.
So if Julian Asshat hadn't been a fucktard liable to go back on his word, he should have bought himself a fucking ticket and hopped on the next plane to DC.
...Assange tweeted that he'd go to the USA if Manning was "granted clemency".
Clemency is a wider concept, which encompasses two other things: Pardon and commutation. So, Obama commuting Manning's sentence was clemency... But did Asshat hop on the next plane to DC? Like fuck he did, the weasel.
"ah umaway" claims:
What a horrible thing to say without knowing the facts. If he is innocent, there is nothing fun about what he suffered through the last seven years.What he's "suffered" -- and, much more, made others suffer -- was all totally of his own making, so the delicious Schadenfreude we're all enjoying now is not "horrible" at all but well-deserved. Nobody ordered him to hole up in that embassy, and nobody certainly ordered him to behave like a fucking skunk while in there. It's all on him.
...imprisonment. Won't count as time served, though. Had he submitted to the legal proceedings in Sweden in stead of running in the first place, he'd be out free now... After a term in Swedish prison that would no doubt have been much nicer than what he got at the Embassy. Which only goes to prove what a stupid fuck he is.
No they weren't, they just relied on bad information. Had you kept à jour with some better sources over the years, you would have known this and not have had to rely on the Vulture's (apparently originally misinformed) recap. Any which way, being wrong isn't "being right" just because you were misled.
Sorry, you tried to compare patents and copyrightYes, because they're utterly comparable.
failing to see the differenceNope, he did. It's just you who are failing to see the immense similarity.
and they don' try to solve the same problemThey try to solve the exact same problem: How to protect for the inventor/author the opportunity to make money off his idea, how to ensure that eventually ideas are equally available for all, and to arrive at a reasonable compromise between these opposing goals.
You keep on attacking me personally ... live just as a parasite ... Sitting on a couch and copying...Yeah, right, and you haven't been insulting at all.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020