abiox

35 ms·

391.
by abiox 9y ago
how do you feel 'anchoring' applies in 'body-image situations'?
392.
by abiox 9y ago
i can't really speak to their claim of subtext. however, > How does tackling one prevent tackling the other? Or even trade off from it? this seems like a red herring question, but to answer literally: in an economic sense, resourc
393.
by abiox 9y ago
trashing a community doesn't often get upvotes. perhaps if you were really funny or clever about it.
394.
by abiox 9y ago
btw "echo chamber" is generally perceived as disparaging, so it's not weird people wouldn't be impressed by that. and feigning victimhood after antagonizing people is pretty gauche.
395.
by abiox 9y ago
> Compare with Google isn't google's situation a monorepo composed of many distinct projects? there doesn't seem much utility in the comparison. > Email isn't about "throughput"; it's "acceptan
396.
by abiox 9y ago
so, jante's 'be humble' is actually coded rationalization for violence. what a world. for some reason this reminds me of a time when a few internet eccentrics were trying to suggest that hegel's dialetic was some kind o
397.
by abiox 9y ago
what are you referring to by "racism"? whatever it is, perhaps it would be useful to ask yourself if there are other interpretations, as well as why you came to the conclusion you did.
398.
by abiox 9y ago
> Ten years ago, so many Americans were making jokes about poor quality Indian code did they? either way, i think you're equivocating. it's not a "racial" or "ethnic" connotated "indian code" tha
399.
by abiox 9y ago
it doesn't seem to me that people are considering things in terms of the "indian race" (if there is such a thing).
400.
by abiox 9y ago
> (borrowed from MS COM) are you referring to microsoft's com (component object model)?
401.
by abiox 9y ago
> Yes let's create another clearly delineated group: junior devs vs senior devs, liberal vs conservative i think it's a clear sign that you're being a bit reductive if you can compare "junior vs senior" with &quo
402.
by abiox 9y ago
oh, i see. so you were pointlessly making a some kind of fallacy argument. no "true" systems programming language, indeed.
403.
by abiox 9y ago
> Both are bad and should be rejected why?
404.
by abiox 9y ago
perhaps, but why did they let the 'bills' get so high?
405.
by abiox 9y ago
how much do you use FB? i wonder how much this assessment owes to familiarity.
406.
by abiox 9y ago
i don't quite follow what you're trying to say.
407.
by abiox 9y ago
is there official confirmation of this? it would seem like a change of pace given how the community vs enterprise feature lists play out: http://www.haproxy.com/products/haproxy-community-vs-enterpr...
408.
by abiox 9y ago
there are separate 'community' and 'enterprise' versions, and there's even a comparison chart on the website.
409.
by abiox 9y ago
> Correcting an assumption can hardly be termed as 'lashing out', maybe a 'robust' response. 'correcting an assumption' seems orthogonal to 'lashing out'. also, it's not clear he even addresse
410.
by abiox 9y ago
"system programming" is not composed entirely of things where GC presents a non-trivial problem.
411.
by abiox 9y ago
apologies, but i don't quite follow. what do you refer to by 'class of systems'? one common sentiment promulgated by rust evangelists is, for example, that go is 'not a systems language' because it has a GC. howev
412.
by abiox 9y ago
> system programming worth mentioning that this term has a broader meaning than how some rust evangelists use it.
413.
by abiox 9y ago
i wonder if this is able to squeeze something useful out of Yahoo Answers.
414.
by abiox 9y ago
i would say that cs is a category of degree that some people can skate through. i would even say that undergrad degrees in general are like this, hence their ubiquity. that isn't to say that undergrad schooling doesn't have utili
415.
by abiox 9y ago
it's a commonly held view that software patents are almost entirely garbage.
416.
by abiox 9y ago
what matters are whether patents are registered (public data), not what fb claims. removing the patent grant only means you are less safe in terms of patents (fb can initiate a suit without penalty), and no more safe in terms of react usage
417.
by abiox 9y ago
this seems like hasty generalization.
418.
by abiox 9y ago
react isn't covered by fb patent, so using react grants nothing in terms of fb patents (implied or otherwise).
419.
by abiox 9y ago
react isn't covered by fb patent. therefore the patent grant could not impact it, by definition (fb even said this, multiple times). if fb wanted to stop react use, they would simply revoke the copyright grant. in the end, all that wa
420.
by abiox 9y ago
> it's their responsibility to prove they're right to the world, not ours i agree, to some extent. but it's also irresponsible to say they're wrong without sound reasoning.

More ›